This p4p Thing?

[RoccoMarciano]

I know what it means to me. What does it mean to you?

[McGrain]

To me it's a way of determining which fighter is "best" independant of the fact that a really good 115lb fighter can't compete with a 215lb fighter in real terms.

[RoccoMarciano]

Originally Posted by McGrain

To me it's a way of determining which fighter is "best" independant of the fact that a really good 115lb fighter can't compete with a 215lb fighter in real terms.

So you are comfortable with stating a "good" 115lb fighter will always remain "good" if he reamins "good" only at 115lbs in a p4p sense?

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by RoccoMarciano

So you are comfortable with stating a "good" 115lb fighter will always remain "good" if he reamins "good" only at 115lbs in a p4p sense?

Yeah, sure. I understand your point though. Certainly there's paydirt for travelling through the weights, this is unquestionably true.

[fists of fury]

Some people get confused about P4P.

They think you can mythically match Mayweather and say, Lewis in a P4P matchup.
"What if Floyd was a heavyweight? Could he beat Lennox?"

Thing is, Floyd Mayweather as a heavyweight would be a totally different fighter. His style would probably be slightly different too.
Things like physics cannot be ignored, so in my mind it's impossible to match the two hypothetically.

The only way you can measure who is the better fighter P4P is by examining their records, quality of opponents, length of championship reign, strengths and weaknesses (not in respect to each other, but in regards that person in isolation) and other such factors.

[RoccoMarciano]

Originally Posted by McGrain

Yeah, sure. I understand your point though. Certainly there's paydirt for travelling through the weights, this is unquestionably true.

It's not that I didn't appreciate your point, McGrain, nothing could be farther from the truth. I obviously don't agree with a p4p rating regarding fighters today, or yesterday, that stayed in their own natural weight class being consiered a p4p great.

It requires upward mobility, for one thing, in my own view. If you lack this, you lack this rating regardless of whether Ring does it or anybody else. How can even ALI really be rated if he can't move up from a HW in my own way of looking at this category?

Anyway, just a different way of looking at the rating, McGrain.

[fists of fury]

Originally Posted by RoccoMarciano

It's not that I didn't appreciate your point, McGrain, nothing could be farther from the truth. I obviously don't agree with a p4p rating regarding fighters today, or yesterday, that stayed in their own natural weight class being consiered a p4p great.

It requires upward mobility, for one thing, in my own view. If you lack this, you lack this rating regardless of whether Ring does it or anybody else. How can even ALI really be rated if he can't move up from a HW in my own way of looking at this category?

Anyway, just a different way of looking at the rating, McGrain.

Explain this to me like I'm 5 years old. I'm not getting what you're saying.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by RoccoMarciano

It's not that I didn't appreciate your point, McGrain, nothing could be farther from the truth. I obviously don't agree with a p4p rating regarding fighters today, or yesterday, that stayed in their own natural weight class being consiered a p4p great.

It requires upward mobility, for one thing, in my own view. If you lack this, you lack this rating regardless of whether Ring does it or anybody else. How can even ALI really be rated if he can't move up from a HW in my own way of looking at this category?

Anyway, just a different way of looking at the rating, McGrain.

The more I run into this view the less unreasonable I find it.

However, it is not my view. I use it as a tool to compare and hopefully learn, about greats across different weight classes. So Hagler, to me, is an ATG p4p even though he didn't move through the weight classes.

Now, someone like Duran would probably figure - as one of the great lightweights of all time - in my top 50, but he certainly wouldn't be at #9 where he currently resides without those performances at WW and MW.

[Sweet Pea]

Originally Posted by fists of fury

Some people get confused about P4P.

They think you can mythically match Mayweather and say, Lewis in a P4P matchup.
"What if Floyd was a heavyweight? Could he beat Lennox?"

Thing is, Floyd Mayweather as a heavyweight would be a totally different fighter. His style would probably be slightly different too.
Things like physics cannot be ignored, so in my mind it's impossible to match the two hypothetically.

The only way you can measure who is the better fighter P4P is by examining their records, quality of opponents, length of championship reign, strengths and weaknesses (not in respect to each other, but in regards that person in isolation) and other such factors.

My thinking exactly.

[Sweet Pea]

Originally Posted by Maurice

I never was too concerned about that P4P shyt. As far as i am concerned Joe Louis would have massacred Ray Robinson. Ali would to the same to duran,leonard,& hearns. Mike Tyson would have fucked De La Hoya up!

Pound for pound my ass. there is too much on that shyt

So, when ranking all time great fighters, you rank Audley Harrison above Sugar Ray Robinson?

[rendog67]

it is to determine who the best boxer on the planet is.

I dont think moving up the divisions is necessary, but if you move up and fight GREAT fighters at the higher weights then that counts for something. It further emphasizes greatness, win, lose or draw.

Most of these modern guys who jump around divisions becoming "five weight" and "six weight" titlists dont impress me as much as, say, Marvin Hagler, sticking at one weight and fighting the best at that weight.
But a guy like Floyd Mayweather Jr. is great because he demonstrates his skills in the ring against good fighters, been fighting world class fighters for about 10 years now. But he's not really any greater for jumping around the divisions, because he's not moving up and down to fight any GREAT fighters (not necessarily his own fault). I think he could have stayed at 130 and 135 and been considered just as great.

A guy who doesn't PUT ON ANY WEIGHT but still fights good fighters in higher weight classes needs to be given A LOAD OF CREDIT in pound-for-pound ratings, in my opinion.
Billy Conn weighed inside the light-heavy limit when he gave Joe Louis a tough fight - surely this counts for something. Sam Langford and others.

[Sweet Pea]

Originally Posted by Maurice

Bro, i dont know if you meant that as a joke or anything. But i would put money on that Ray Leonard Would kick Fraudley's ass.

Harrison is a Heavyweight, Leonard was a Welterweight. Audley has a weak chin with decent skill as a Heavyweight, and Leonard was great as a Welterweight, but in a head to head matchup, Audley is far too big.

Do you understand pound for pound now? Buster Douglas would beat Roberto Duran, that doesn't make him a greater, more skilled boxer.

[Florida boy]

i think an overall pound for pound greatest doesnt work, its easier to break it down into weight classes. thats just my opinion. i dont think accomplishments always matter, they should weigh in, but with the generational gap, its hard to compare a modern fighter to an old school cat.

[Florida boy]

Originally Posted by Sweet Pea

Harrison is a Heavyweight, Leonard was a Welterweight. Audley has a weak chin with decent skill as a Heavyweight, and Leonard was great as a Welterweight, but in a head to head matchup, Audley is far too big.

Do you understand pound for pound now? Buster Douglas would beat Roberto Duran, that doesn't make him a greater, more skilled boxer.

very true. its like the RJJ vs Robinson match up, everyone acts like Jones would get owned, but if it was at light heavy, Robinson would get stopped IMO, in more complete fashion then his retiring due to exhaustion against Maxim. Jones just to big with just as much if not more athleticism.