Minimum Requierment to be in the P4P LIST!

[mellow_mood]

P4P is not a literal term....

Its just a concept created so we can compare guys of different weight divisions. So you can compare the "greateness" of a heavyweight or cruiserweight against a bantamweight or featherweight to decide who is better since they can never fight. Its based on skills and who you have beaten, which can be accomplished in a single division or multiple division.

Fighting in multiple divisions should not be a minimum, but at the same time a guy who does will have a better chance of making it, because more than likely he will be moving up in weight, giving the perception of accomplishment by beating men bigger than himself. Also, it will give him access to the best fighters in multiple divisions, and not just his own.

Basically, making the P4P list isnt and "end" of fighting in multiple divisions, but an easier means of making the list.

yeah..

i have learn a lot today about the P4P THING. and what really p4p means. Im being honest i have seen quite posts here in where i have learn a lot.


Any "Hagler" currently active these days?

that we should include in the p4p list?

izzy will be the hagler of this days...

[mellow_mood]

mellow_mood's current p4p list 5/11/09

1- Manny Pacquiao
2- Bernard Hopkins
3- Juan Manuel Marquez
4- Paul Williams
5- Shane Mosley
6- Ivan Calderon
7- Vic Darchinan
8- Miguel Cotto
9- Israel Vazquez & rafael marquez
10- Tomas Adamek

[mellow_mood]

bumpppppppppppppp!!!


this might help to sell VLADS case on the p4p list!!!



as you can see... i got but for me it wasnt owned.. it was instructed!!!!

thanks for the lesson guys!!!!!

enjoy some good posts!!!

[BennyST]

I know that every single p4p list that we may find around the internet or any boxing board/forum etc etc is going to be different, cos its only represents the oppionion of somebody else.


BUT...

Shouldnt that list have at least a minimum requirement? for me to be in the p4p list.. u need at least to be a 2 division champion. I know theres a lot "catch weight" fights out there that are as significant or bigger than any other fight... but i think it would be nice.. if at least we could have some ..

basic standard measure to figure out the most "correct" list.

With that being said..

I dont think that any fighter who only have one belt @ one division should be consider to be in the p4p list.


Do you agree?

No, there does need to be certain things done and you have to have held a title for a while and defended it well for a couple of times, but you definitely don't have to be a two division champion. That's absurd.

In that sense you could have a guy that started out in the best division in boxing and stayed there his whole career dominating it because all the biggest fights were there, the toughest opponents and an entire careers worth of tough opponents and you wouldn't put him in, or you could have some guy that cruises through two ****ty divisions and rack up a couple of titles of the easiest title holders and you would put him in.

Nah, it's all about who you beat and the longevity of your reign and how you do it.

[mellow_mood]

No, there does need to be certain things done and you have to have held a title for a while and defended it well for a couple of times, but you definitely don't have to be a two division champion. That's absurd.

In that sense you could have a guy that started out in the best division in boxing and stayed there his whole career dominating it because all the biggest fights were there, the toughest opponents and an entire careers worth of tough opponents and you wouldn't put him in, or you could have some guy that cruises through two ****ty divisions and rack up a couple of titles of the easiest title holders and you would put him in.

Nah, it's all about who you beat and the longevity of your reign and how you do it.

yeahh

I learn it already!!!!!!


i bumped my own thread to see if this discussion can help on the thread of cleggs about vlad being on the p4p list!!!!

i think he does...

and i change my wholve point of view with this threads with post like this one...

thanks again man!

btw how u doing man?

[BennyST]

yeahh

I learn it already!!!!!!


i bumped my own thread to see if this discussion can help on the thread of cleggs about vlad being on the p4p list!!!!

i think he does...

and i change my wholve point of view with this threads with post like this one...

thanks again man!

btw how u doing man?

Very good thank you sir!

I'm not sure about the big Klit. I can just see too many of the smaller guys beating his style if he were up against that same style of the smaller guys. You know what I mean?

His style is like a massive Mikkel Kessler with less movement and less risks and I can see a much quicker guy with better movement and power beating that.

The other thing that is the biggest advantage to the Klit, and this is most important, is his ridiculous size advantage and if he was the same size as other fighters or if you transplanted him to the welterweights then there are many fighters that would beat him pretty easily.

That's my take on it.

[mellow_mood]

Very good thank you sir!

I'm not sure about the big Klit. I can just see too many of the smaller guys beating his style if he were up against that same style of the smaller guys. You know what I mean?

His style is like a massive Mikkel Kessler with less movement and less risks and I can see a much quicker guy with better movement and power beating that.

The other thing that is the biggest advantage to the Klit, and this is most important, is his ridiculous size advantage and if he was the same size as other fighters or if you transplanted him to the welterweights then there are many fighters that would beat him pretty easily.

That's my take on it.

yeah i know what u mean... but i think he deserves to be on the list.. at least more than caballero...


also.. do u think that because of the size advantage are the reason why paul williams isnt on the list??

[mellow_mood]

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...=1#post7304972



^^ POST # 4.


SOME LINKING HERE FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES