Abolish P4P!

That's right, I'm waging a one-man grassroots jihad against the status quo, campaigning to get the entire community - writers, broadcasters, fans alike - to forsake this broken and unworthy system that blatantly disregards talent in favor of marketability and name recognition. :deal

It's going to start here, and spread to the boxrec forums, and then - the WORLD. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (shout out to my cousin shane)

Who's with me? :happy:happy:happy:happy:happy

 

It is sometimes necessary to make sacrifices for the cause! :twisted:


VIVA LA REVOLUCION!

 

This is about reform. Coming up with a new alternative - but first we must slay the beast of tradition. The current method is nice in theory, but ANTONIO TARVER in the top 10????????? I think you see my point.

p4p may have originally been intended to mean "who's the best fighter regardless of weight class" but it's come to mean "who's counted the biggest coups against other "star"-caliber fighters on PPV". Accomplishment should not be part of the equation. Cristian Mijares only has ONE huge marquee win. But in a pure p4p list - the way it should be done, not the way it is done - he'd have to be on anyone's top five because in that one fight alone (setting aside for a moment his great fights with Kawashima or any others that tv audiences haven't seen) he demonstrated that in terms of skill, he is one of the best fighters in the world without regard to weight class.

 

WHAT? You're saying Duran and SRL would not be ATG legends if the abstract, subjective, non-scientific, useless p4p format didn't exist????? They'd have just been forgotten, buried in the sands of time because there wasn't a made-up ranking system by definition impervious to empirical proof? ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND?

What is this assumption that only heavyweights will ever be given credit without p4p rankings? This isn't 1900. We have featherweights headlining ppvs. Boxing may be fringe right now but the hardcore contingent don't need a patronizing p4p format to know that the talent is spread throughout the pro ranks, from minimum to unlimited, and that individual fighters ought to be recognized on their own merits.

You're completely missing the point I think. I know why p4p was invented. In SRR's time not being a heavyweight champ limited your visibility and potential star power. Alright fine, so they made up a way for smaller fighters to get credit in an era where it wasn't readily available to them. No problem with that. But what I'm trying to do is isolate and destroy the virus that has infected p4p rankings - the "beat the man to be the man" mentality that has NOTHING to do with recognizing talent regardless of weight class. If a guy looks fantastic against an endless stream of B-level opposition, he deserves more credit than some protected hack who got pushed through some ABC org's rankings by a coddling promoter and put in with a weak paper champ.

You're arguing on behalf of the ideal of what p4p should be - what it maybe used to be, or maybe never quite was. I'm not arguing with you over an ideal. I'm warring against the bleak reality of what IS. The reality of p4p is NOT your ideal. Did you even read my initial post before you first replied or did you just see the title and reflexively start typing "Silly..."? You think I am proposing that we rate competitors head-to-head so that Shannon Briggs is over Rafael Marquez? WHAT? Why would you make that leap of (il)logic? What I'm saying is that p4p is a BROKEN system, ruined by people's tendency to gravitate toward star power. The way people formulate p4p rankings does NOT equate to an accurate assessment of who is the best regardless of weight