Okay this question was put to me by a good friend but who is a casual boxing fan. He put it like this" Heavyweight division is the blue ribbon division in the sport so should a dominant Heavyweight champion of any era be considered Pound4Pound #1? He wanted to stress he meant "Dominant" champions not fighters who picked up the belt. He crazy? Am i for indulging him?
I don't think just being a dominant heavyweight champion automatically means you're number 1. Wilder was pretty dominant, but against cans. It depends on who they beat
But in this situation Wilder isn't the dominant champion of his era. Fury is. So if Fury becomes Undisputed Heavyweight champ say within the year should he be considered P4P #1in this scenario?
I think that would also depend on who Fury beats. Let's say Dubois fluke KOs Usyk, then Fury beats him to become undisputed. I don't think that would be significant enough to put him ahead of Crawford or Inoue. However, if he beat Usyk to become undisputed, then I definitely think it would be enough to put him at the top. Usyk is someone who's also in contention for P4P number 1 IMO. To me, it's all about who you beat.
If I remember correctly, the term P4P was invented by sports writers to pay tribute to Sugar Ray Robinson and compare boxers of different weight classes. Thus, this kind of P4P-modell or the original purpose applies equally to all weight classes. I am not sure if Mike Tyson was the last HW P4P #1 according to "The Ring"?
I guess in someways the heavyweight champ is the pound for pound number 1 guy. Not unless middleweight Gennady Golovkin can jump in the ring and beat Fury head to head.
That would be the opposite of what it's about for me. P4P was invented i reckon to recognise the best fighters at any weight. Obviously heavyweights are the best in the actual ring with no weight restrictions. P4P is about the smaller guys. Don't get me wrong, a heavyweight can absolutely be the best P4P fighter in the world if he faring better vs as good or better opposition than his peers. Per the thread, a dominant Heavyweight champ isn't P4P king if someone in a lower division is more dominant against as good or better opposition. That's what the P4P game is about.
I believe the last heavyweight champ at #1 P4P was Mike Tyson in 1989. That's a long time. He deserved it by fighting everyone in the Top 10 and then some. Since then, however, no heavyweight has come close. Maybe Wlad did for a minute but he was too cautious for everyone's liking. So to answer the question: no, it shouldn't by automatic. It depends who they fight, how often and how dominant.
P4P rankings tend to favour lighter weight fighters because they generally possess naturally greater P4P attributes overall. Degree of domination in one’s particular weight division can be a possible feature to consider - but the weight division itself, in it own right, shouldn’t enhance or dis-enhance the ranking. Per your friends view - hypothetically, IF all Champs were equally dominant across all divisions, he’d choose the HW Champ as P4P # 1 simply because they reside in the HW division- which actually contradicts and defeats the intended purpose of the concept of P4P rankings - a concept that divorces size differences from the equation.
My bad JT. I must've left myself in the thread while you made your post. I basically said what you said AFTER you said it. Great minds think alike. Greater minds submit their posts first.
