The concept goes way back to bare-knuckle times and continues to intrigue. I do however understand why many are sick of it. You've got the constant 'P4P King' narrative of Canelo, and there's Bud on his latest fight poster being advertised as the best. It's like a shouting contest. Super-Flyweight Kazuto Ioka was mentioned in this thread. That's another point. P4P is all weights. Not just lightweight and above. As a general rule, I think it's too frequently discussed. Only when a boxer has made a genuine statement should we reconsider.
I still don't understand how the hell P4P is even evaluated. And every time someone tries to explain it to me (usually in a condescending "how can you be so dumb?" way) it only makes me realise that they don't either. Far as I can see after years of hearing this nonsense being bandied about like it's a real thing it's nothing more than a way for fans to feel some sort of vicarious superiority over others without the onus of having their man ever needing to prove it. Completely childish ****-swinging in other words. Someone like Usyk doesn't need a made up title for his fans to know he's a top class fighter; everything he's done in the ring is evidence of that.
It is a nonsense. Used purely for hyping up a fighter for the casual audience. I mean, any casual fan who can get their head around the fact that a featherweight champion cannot compete with the super-middleweight champion, for example, is bamboozled into believing another pecking order exists, the mythical p4p ratings. Absolute rubbish.
I don't totally agree with some that you can't judge P4P or it 'doesn't exist' but I do think most arguments pertaining to and around it are stupid (with the biggest problem being imo that most 'fans' simply are not good at evaluating fighters, being extremely subjective rather than objective). Most of the times it's used for someone to try and btfo a fan of another fighter. In my opinion most of the top p4p fighters are pretty obvious to any fan with a brain and solid upkeep with the current scene anyway. I'd prefer to see other people appreciate fights and divisions more on their standalone quality rather than the esb subjective p4p question.
If Fury doesn’t need a made up title to feel good about himself then why is it that he’s been calling himself the lineal champion for the last three years?
Because lineal status of fighters is how fighting championships formed from the dawn of mankind? The best man beating the best man. They are the top dog. The dogs nuts. The crème de la crème. It's the OG title. Before commissions even existed.
Porter is a WAY better fighter than Plant. Plant was landing easy shots against Canelo. Porter had to work. If Crawford just takes some more fights, we'll be able to easily see he's the best lb for lb fighter. But he can't wait for Spence, and can't go to middleweight to get them.
one day fury's dick will be stuck deep on your throath and you will not be able to breath and you will die. Be careful, due, we dont want you to die.
I think P4P is very fun to talk about, but it's not serious. I like comparing across weight divisions and eras. I watch old fights on YouTube side by side which can be very revealing. Put Hagler on one screen, LaMotta on the other and see what they look like side by side. ESPN has a raging hard on for any kind of list. They've blown the college football rankings into a circus that sucks the fun out of the sport and they treat P4P like they're Moses showing God Arum's Ten Commandments to the chosen people. Could have said the same thing about Crawford for several years. I thought Crawford vs Porter was marginally more impressive than Canelo vs Plant, but Canelo has several resume items that Crawford has no answer for (even though Canelo is younger).
Nobody cares. There’s no other fighters in other weight classes going round saying they are the lineal champion. It’s just something fury and Warren went with as part of his rebranding on his return.
