How can anybody be ranked above Usyk pound for pound?

Everyone just makes up whatever p4p means to them bro. It's not a big deal.

Honestly those who do not rate Usyk on p4p list are just being traditionalists. They may not even know it. I've ran into plenty who can only tell you that's how p4p is meant to be, not why.


p4p begins with SRR, George Gainford used it as a means to promote SRR despite his not being a HW and the basic promotion for none-HW boxing stars began. That said, it should be clear George's and so the original usage of the term, excluded HWs.


So there is your basis for no hws in p4p. As to folks who rate Usyk but under TC, I can't say.


As to p4p becoming whatever fans say it is, that's because writers do it first. Boxing writers, either in ignorance or because they are motivated by money I can't say. But once you have writers rating HWs and explaining what p4p is wrongly then you can't hardly blame fans who adopt it.


Very similar to lineal being whatever made up bull**** people like most having little to nothing to do with the actual history that actually took place.


Still waiting on Adam Pollack or Matt Dunnellon to tell me what other QB champions they recognized based on mixed rules fights. Everyone knows Sully is the first QB champion and these historians only write what happened so it shouldn't be hard to explain how the first QB lineal champion never won a QB fight in his career or heard of the term lineal champion in his lifetime. Shouldn't be a gotcha question. It should be the most obvious and basic question anyone has about a record that features nothing but mixed rules being called champion over any one set. You know, if you do research instead of reprinting others.

 

Define p4p. For me when someone says "p4p great" I immediately think of someone that surpasses what should be the limits of his body. I can't think of any other boxer better than Usyk when it comes to that (maybe Holyfield but that's about it). He on average gives up like 20-30 lbs to his opponents while too often (in fact always other than against Chisora and Witherspoon) being the shorter man with shorter reach and smaller body structure and he is the best fighter in the division without any competition.

 

Clearly not. There's a huge gap between Usyk and everyone else. It's ridiculously desperate to even attempt to put anyone over Usyk.

Usyk is a true modern day great. He would be great and P4P number 1 in any generation.

But some suspects of the usual kind have to always put someone like TC as no 1, it's just the way they are.

 

P4P is a load of rubbish that was popularized by Pacquiao and Floyd.

Crawford and Canelo are bums by allowing promoters to promote them using this term and buying in to it. USYK is the P4P king and has been for many years yet never claims such a silly accolade.

A big reason why Crawford and Canelo suck is they actually seem to care and bieng called p4p. After Canelo bullies Crawfish or Crawfish boxes that ginger midgets head off their ego's are going to be ridiculous over 1 win, Canelo winning is him beating a 38 year old former light welter lol! And Crawford winning...well Canelo has already shown he fumbles against legit boxers and losing to Crawford cements his ginger no soul status

 

Being the best heavyweight in the world makes you absolutely the best boxer in the world. If that's ever possibly not the case, the boxer will move up to heavyweight and make it so, prove it. As Usyk has done.

Saying Floyd Mayweather ranks above Wladimir Klitschko is like saying Flo-Jo was faster than Carl Lewis.
Mayweather would lose to Mariusz Wach. That is reality.

 

Crawford and inoue beat larger competition pools and did so more dominantly. Some don’t rate fury and Joshua as unstoppable monsters and instead look at their lackluster cws. Nery has a much better prime win than either of them. Usyk at #1 is dependent on how highly you rate the shw advantage

 

What a strange post

 

Well, it is about boxing. What are you here to talk about? Deez nuts?

 

p4p is how you rate as a package. your abilities and the results of those abilities against other quantifiable packages. at the most basic and commonly used factors you have records. the more you know and understand you can add stuff like quality of opposition, technical ability of all fighters involved, etc...
a simple way of looking at it is by thinking of fights as tasks. assign a level of difficulty 1-10 to each task. elite guys rank high on difficulty of task, bums rate low. now rate a fighters winning performance also from 1-10, from gifted the win to complete domination. the obvious p4p package is the one that can put in a 10 performance against a 10 package, or a complete domination of an elite fighter. that guy is the best tool for the job, the job called boxing.

 

I'm surprised Inoue worshippers still haven't arrived.

 

That and...

If we're honest, on most global online discussion boards, you'll find exceptionalism - usually American exceptionalism, sometimes racial exceptionalism of multiple flavours.

You're going to get people desperately looking for excuses to rank Crawford above Usyk just because he's American... They might not admit it, but sometimes it's just there - even when it's outrageously obvious the two aren't comparable (you can say the same about people who ranked Wilder above Joshua when both were champs - resumes, skill levels, etc weren't remotely comparable, but as only one was a yank....)

 

No. But strange referee to Matt and Springs.

 

P4P always has been and always will an inexact science.

One could be forgiven for thinking it was devised just to cause arguments.

 

Oh I see, you followed along just fine through the portion where I criticized the boxing media for their lack of research in their writing but became confused by the in-house reference?

Since allusion seems lost on this forum let me explain in very plain words; I called bull****. Homie's full of ****, understood perfectly fine, and is just here to defend his man crush. So, deez nuts, confirmed.