|
|
|
#1 |
|
newbie
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 25
vCash: 1000 |
A couple of threads recently have pointed out a curious phenomenon that I think is misrepresented, or of which I do not understand the definition. Posters reguraly rank HWs such Ali or Johnson high on all-time P4P ratings. How can this be? Both rarely fought fighters significantly larger than themselves, but often held reach or weight advantages over their opponents. My understanding of a highly rated P4P fighter would be someone who fought successfully against opponents who were larger than themselves or in weight classes above their own natural division. Ali and Johnson really do not fall under these definitions, and thus may be ranked highly but only in their weight class or from a historical perspective. Armstrong or Langford come to mind as true examples, or even Louis being that he was the giant slayer of the HW division (Carnera, Buddy and Max Baer, and Simon). Any thoughts?
|
|
| Sponsored Links |
|
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 452
vCash: 1000 |
I hear what you are saying, but there is another way to assess P4P greatness, on top of performance against bigger guys.
i.e. Superiority over same-sized guys. For example, those who believe Ali's performance over Cleveland Williams to be one of the greatest displays in boxing can grant him high P4P status. No, Williams wasnt bigger than Ali, but he was toyed with like a child DESPITE being the same size. Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
ESB ELITE SQUAD
East Side Guru
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PITTSBURG CA
Posts: 7,923
vCash: 297 |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
ESB ELITE SQUAD
East Side Guru
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PITTSBURG CA
Posts: 7,923
vCash: 297 |
Quote:
p4p is rated on skill vs skill on an even playing field no adantages |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Champion
East Side Guru
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,352
vCash: 1000 |
Ross is number 1. Ross is number 1,
No heavyweights outside of Ruby Fitz made my top ten. The REASON Fitz made the top ten is because he was a middleweight champ, that capture the heavyweight crown. He did what Walker and Ketchal failed to do. |
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
ESB ELITE SQUAD
East Side Guru
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PITTSBURG CA
Posts: 7,923
vCash: 297 |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 10,085
vCash: 1000 |
I actually rate Marciano higher p4p than as a head-to-head heavy, as he was so small. Fitz is the other guy to consider, obviously, but perhaps we should include Dempsey, who was the equivalent of a modern day cruiser.
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Hardcore......to the max!
East Side Guru
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: The Kingdom of Fife, Scotland.
Posts: 7,734
vCash: 1000 |
Of course you can.
The notion that you can't is ridiculous to me. The term 'p4p' means if all the fighters were the same weight and height as one another who would be best. Its perfectly acceptable to think that heavyweights would do well against any other fighters from another weight class if those fighters were the same size. |
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 63,254
vCash: 1000 |
As far as I am concerned p4p is just a way of comparing fighters directly even though they could never fight. I have Ali and Louis very high on my p4p list and i'm quite happy with that.
As to recently, who can really say that Tyson or Lewis wasn't one of the best fighters in the world when at their peaks? |
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 63,254
vCash: 1000 |
Quote:
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|