How do we Factor Losses in P4P Rankings?

[KingHippo]

Some people seem to ignore losses, I think losses count, as they should.

People make up excuses for Lomachenko's loss. I think he lost fair and square. He b1tched instead of returning Salido in kind. Being a b1tch won't save you in this pro game.

Usyk did tonight something that was much more impressive than what Loma ever did. Completely dominated someone who had a tight grip on the cruiserweight division for a full 6 years. Did the same with the man who beat him. Loma's best win is against someone who beat Rigo's leftovers while having a weight advantage over him.

Is there any rationale for having Lomachenko in the top 5 (and even no 1 in some cases) and Usyk not in the top 10 at all?

[_original_]

P4P is generally "what have you done for me lately" type of system, so yes they do matter. I don't knock Loma for his loss to Salido too much now because it was close and he's had some good wins after that fight. Roma losing to this Thai guy the first time didn't hurt his stock too much because it was close and many felt he actually won the fight. However, after getting leveled tonight he's definitely off any credible list.

[canucks9314]

Depends on who you lose to and the manner of the loss.

It can even help you. For instance, Danny Jacobs undoubtedly increased his p4p status with his performance against GGG despite losing.

[HarvardBlue]

If you're popular beloved fighter it doesn't matter. If you're hated by most fans they'll move you down simply for not fighting enough. Lol.