1) Pac 2) FMJ 3) Mosley 4) JMM 5) Williams 6) B-Hop 7) Cotto 8) V. Klit 9) Donaire 10) Haye 11) W.Klit 12) Abraham 13) Calderon 14) Dawson No ranking for either Vasquez or Marquez atm, and B-Hop will go down in ranking regardless of his result with RJJ. Also, despite the fact I hate him and think he lost to Dirrell...wins over Pascal, Taylor and Dirrell mean even Carl Froch has a better resume than Dawson, I'll leave him out due to personal preference. It wouldn't upset me to see John/Kessler above Dawson either. Why it's become so fasionable to have Dawson top 10 P4P is beyond me!!!
A question for all those that think Dawson is top 10 P4P...has he beaten anyone that you would consider top 30P4P at the time he beat them?? I wouldn't.
What has Williams done that is so much better than what Dawson has done? Beat a shot Wright? Lost to Quintana?
I wouldnt say he is top ten just yet but he on the cusp. The kid has wins over Adamek(his only lose) and beat Tarver and Glen Johnson. He has all the skills, talent, he has shown heart if people question his chin. He is a good combination puncher has good hand speed and improving on his defense....If he fights Hopkins, any of the super 6 guys who move up and wins he gets a lower top ten spot on my list....And for the record who the hell really thought David Haye belongs there.....P4P is the best most complete fighters around, Haye aint even close he is too crude. My P4P List 1)Mayweather 2)Pacquiao 3)Ivan Calderon(gets overlooked and is probably the best pure boxer today) 4)Juan Manel Marquez 5)Bernard Hopkins 6)Israel Vazquez 7)Rafael Marquez 8)Miguel Cotto 9)Shane Mosley 10)Kelly Pavlik a few good wins and he makes it, I believe he is lower top 15
This is the true p4p top 10 1. Pacquiao 2. Mayweather 3. Marquez 4. Hopkins 5. Williams 6. Mosley 7. Donaire 8. Dawson 9. John 10. Vitali Klitscko
I think Haye has beaten more titlists than that. Mormec, Enzo, Fragomeni, Valuev and Williams off the top of my head. So at least 5.
This is a fair point but lets not forget he beat the invincible looking Maragarito at the time...has won titles in 2 weights and was to challenge for a 3rd. Though you do have a point, perhaps Williams is overated P4P, he's yet to prove himself the man in any one division. Sometimes I feel that style is rated over substance in P4P.
Why should Haye be overlooked?? unified one weight and took a title in another (where he is giving up substantial weight and height). Because he goes in there and gets tagged, I'm not sure why that should effect his P4P ranking?? If every fighter fought like Dawson more people would be watching MMa.
Being exciting dont make you a pound for pound fighter. Haye all the physical tools but his mechanics and technique are porous. His defense is decent at best. Pound for pound is the best fighter or fighters in the world pound for pound skill for skill regardless of weight, he doesnt make the cut. Pac-Man and Mayweather have solid fundamentals to go with there physical gifts thus why they have the most success and best results. Haye aint even on the same street as them skillwise.
That was the original premise of P4P but it's moved on from that IMO, and you simply can't overlook resume and acheivements. Margarito is about as limited a fighter as you could wish to find, but he surely had to be a P4P top 10 guy after beating Cotto (who was in many people's top 3). If he can be, I see no reason Haye can't!?!?! Also, Darchinyan was making a lot of peoples top 10 before the Agbeko fight, yet he was a puncher with quite limited technique and quite a porous defense!!
I see what you're saying but one or 2 good wins dont make you p4p either. Darchinyan and Margarito are exciting but they were one-dimensional. I never rated either guy in my top ten, even win Margarito beat Cotto. He'd already lost to Paul Williams, lost to Santos, and is a wholly ordinary fighter. Dachinyan had underrated skills to me, sure he could punch but he didnt get hit as much as Haye and Margarito. Also unlike Margarito he can deal with fighters bigger than himself.
It's not my way, but I can totally see where you're coming from and as long as you're consistent...I don't have any problem with it. I guess I just give more weight to resume and acheivements whereas you look more at transferable skills. No wrong way, just has to be consistent.