I hate Asero. I don't know whether it's that his point is lost in translation or that he has no point at all. I suspect the latter.
hate is a strong word my friend... im just trying to say that all-time p4p is prime vs prime list..more of head to head list... whereas ATG is based on accomplishment... there are fighters the had a short prime that diminished their accomplishment bec longetivity is an integral part of accomplishment... throw away off-night in p4p list while every fight is almost considered in ATG..that is because only best form is considered in a p4p list. in the thread burns vs tyson..we would envision their best moments and that is the one we should look at in a p4p list..
You're right, hate is a strong word. I don't hate you, I just dislike your posts. Very strongly. Look, best form isn't considered in an ALL-TIME P4P list....that in itself is an ATG list. Current P4P top 10 (i.e The Ring) is done on form, yes, but ATG lists (which feature fighters from all weight divisions) is done on a body of work.
p4p is designed and defined this way...#3 would BEAT #4... while #4 would BEAT#5 in the same weight atg is that #3 accomplished more than #4... while #4 accomplished more than #5... look at the boxing definition of p4p and get back to me...
So if Klitschko was no.9 in the P4P rankings and Mosley was no.6, then Shane would beat Wlad? atsch look up the definitions of P4P and get back to me.
P4P is nothing to do with the same weights. What you mean is ATG list in certain weights. Damn you're irritating. I'm sure if more people were A) Online or B) Bothered enough to look at this awful thread would share my sentiments. I won't bother replying again, I'm finished with this conversation.
what ? can't you understand my post..Ok i'll make it clear. Had p4p#3 and p4p#4 fight in the same weight, #3 would beat #4...that is pound for pound..do you agree with me?
^^^agree, but #3 is a better quality fighter than #4...meaning, that the #3 fighter would have most wins than #4 fighter had they fought the same set of opponents... but doesn't necessarily mean with better resume...because some fighters have a very short prime. an example i would make is the 168 division...joe calzaghe may be #1ATG in that division...but Roy jones would never lose to any 168 fighter since its was born...had they fought wherein both are on their primes, jones would beat calzaghe, thus jones would be a better p4p fighter than jcal iat 168 but jcal accomplish more in that division.
Get a dictionary and look this up: in my opinion. Quit stating all this stuff like it is fact. It isn't.
Once again, you do the same thing. You mean, IN YOUR OPINION jones would beat calzaghe... Don't state it like it's a fact. It isn't.
1) Have you even read any of my posts? Didn't I just say that IMO the greatest fighters from each of the eight traditional weight classes belong in my top ten p4p of all-time? 2) Where do you come up with this? There are many who consider Zarate or Ortiz or Olivares or Brown or McGovern as the best banty ever.
They are one and the same. But then again, this is from the same guy that says Flash Elorde was better than all-time great Sandy Saddler. Consider the source.