Year-end pound for pound poll

I had him in my top 10. He's tough and has good power, but I don't think he's p4p top 5.

Two reasons:
1. Eye test. He looks too flat-footed to me, besides Floyd schooled him very easily, far easier than Maidana for example.
2. He is a very big 154 lb. His biggest advantage is usually that he's far heavier than his opponent via rehydration. For me that affects p4p ranking.

 

I rate Canelo very highly. Were he to have beaten, say, Billy Joe Saunders or one of the top light-middleweights this year, he'd be in my top 10.

 

So you're Pound 4 Pound list has a lot to do with who you beat this calender year? In that case, who has Lomachenko beaten? Walters was supposed to be a tough opponent, but he just completely laid down and quit on his stool? I know Walters beat Darchinyan and Donaire, but on the night he wasn't impressive at all. I can't fault Lomachenko for that, but at the same time Lomachenko hasn't fought (and beat) anyone really near the quality opponents Canelo has over the course of his career.

I don't think Pound 4 Pound lists should have that much to do with who you've fought recently. It's more about a fighter's skill level and how he performs in the ring. I can see beating big names helping someones P4P ranking, but I don't think matchmaking in recent fights should exclude a fighter from the list. I mean sure Walters fought bigger name opponents than say Beefy Smith, but I was extremely disapointed in Walters and the guy just completely quit. What I'm getting at is I rate Lomachenko highly on my Pound 4 Pound list not really based on who he beat or fought but how the guy performs in the ring, his skills.

 

1. Gonzales
2. Canelo
3. Rigondeaux
4. Crawford
5. Ward
6. Kovalev
7. Pacquiao
8. Frampton
9. DeGale
10. Lomachenko

 

i don't have in my top 5 because, as many have said his footwork, seems very plodding, for want of a better word, for me. And he's obviously not a LMW, yet insists on staying there beating up smaller guys and making a mockery of the middleweight title fighting at 155, then just giving his belt to GGG...a much better question is why you have Spence in your top 10?

 

We're talking about two distinctly different things here. Who you beat vs you're skills in the ring.

What is Pound 4 Pound about in your mind : How would you define it : Who you beat or you're skills? To me, it's about your skills. Who you fight and beat is important don't get me wrong, because it allows you to showcase your skills vs top opposition, but that's not what Pound 4 Pound lists should be based on.

It seems that the main reasons he is not on some people's P4P lists is the Floyd Mayweather fight (which has been mis-percieved from the beginning) and complaints about how much he re-hydrates. These to me are not reasons to exclude someone from a pound 4 pound list. If anything the fact that he was literally drained at a catchweight required by Floyd should offset any complaints about his performance in that fight, especially if you use the fact that he rehydrates so much as a reason to exclude him.

 

Why I have Spence at #10? Skills. He's a very skilled fighter. To be honest I wasn't that confident about my #9 and #10. To me I was confident in my Top 6, as I feel that anyone in my Top 4 specifically or even Top 6 could be argued as #1 P4P. I was much less confident about my #9 and #10 picks. I felt there was a real drop off after my Top 6.

(and to your first point) I don't think your reasons like "making a mockery of the MW title fighting at 155" is relevent at all to Pound 4 Pound rankings. And need I remind you that Cotto and Khan needed the 155 catchweight NOT Canelo. (unsurprisingly Cotto is doing yet another catchweight vs Kirkland) Canelo was blamed for Cotto and Khan needing Catchweights to fight him plain and simple.

 

Agree on skills but i disagree on a point you said earlier on the thread that who you exhibit your skills against doesn't matter, as long as you're showing skills, i personally think it does as how do we know how good those skills are if you're fighting someone clearly beneath you (hence the reluctance of most to jump on the AJ train). Totally agree about what you say regarding top 6, i think everyone knows roughly who the top 6 are just have different variations.

i think everything that happens involving a boxer in terms of actual boxing is relevant no matter how innocuous, and yes THEY needed the catchweights, he didn't, so why agree to them? fight an actual MW instead. You can't hold a Middleweight title and claim you're not a middleweight imo.

 

P4p is a discussion. That is all.. Subjective personal opinion based on a fictional scenario. Who would be the best if they were all the same size???? Well what size are we having them? Wouldn't a HW Pac be a completely different fighter? Wouldn't a FW Wlad be too? I mean you work to your attributes.... A fighters speed would diminish with size and so would power. Odd concept really.

 

Exactly what I mean. Opponents matter. Fighters have to prove themselves in the ring. Canelo hasn't done that in a while and I think he needs a good win to justify his inclusion in the top 10.

 

I'll chime in for the sake of democracy, even though P4P is an entirely nonsensical concept. I'm an eyetest guy though, and unashamedly so.

1 Lomachenko
2 Rigondeaux
3 Chocolatito
4 Golovkin
5 Usyk
6 Kovalev
7 Ward
8 Crawford
9 Frampton
10 Lara