Well not officially he didn't. As I said just for résumé today, Joshua is on it. But not in an actual list
Frankly, if there is a dispute as to who the P4P best fighter is then there is no P4P best. You gotta ask yourself, who's all around skillset you would rather have no matter what weight you fought in. The total package.
The problem with this is that Canelo's draw and win over GGG both have a giant asterisk next to them, regardless of whether or not you believe he rightfully won either or both fights (and the argument exists that he certainly did win both). His own history of fighting at 'Canelo-weight' and being busted for PEDs are other things that leave a bad taste in people's mouths, and are rightfully counted against his p4p king status (is he really 'that good' or is he just a cheat who bullies smaller weight-classes?). Coupled with his status as one of the box-office kings - and thus recipient of so-called 'gift decisions' - and suddenly Canelo's record looks a lot more shady and suspect than it initially reads. The fact that he is still in the conversation anyway shows how good Canelo is regardless, but if we are judging p4p best by quality of opponents and records, the asterisks are enough to keep me grimacing.
I agree, his resume ain't ****. Loma's isn't all that good either, but with Russell Jr. on it, it's better than Crawford's.
His Resume is tainted though its a lot easier when you have the judges and commission in your pocket.
The only win that Lomachenko has that I consider better than Crawford’s win over Postol is the Gary Russell win.
Canelo is up there due to his resume and his skills, but you need to judge p4p on dominance as well. He has had a lot of fights that could’ve went the other way. He’s top 5 and one of my favourite fighters but you can’t really make a case for him being pound for pound number one imo.
None of this has anything to do with being the P4P best fighter in the world. P4P isn't really even about wins and losses, or "decisions" it's about how skilled you are as a fighter, with an emphasis on recent performances. It's not really about anything else than observating how a fighter fights in the ring and rating his skills subjectively. It's not even really about if you win rounds, it's about your skills. You could still be P4P #1 even if you lose a decision, if you just fought the wrong strategy for example, maybe you were outworked but you showcased a higher level of skills. The level of competition is a factor of course, Canelo fought GGG twice which is a harder more difficult fight to win than anybody who Lomachenko or Crawford have fought. So the fact that those fights were close decisions don't do anything to diminish his P4P status. His P4P status is determined by how impressive he was in both fights. No one on the P4P list has shown the ability to use the kind of footwork he used in the first GGG fight, then showcase a come-forward approach. It shows that Canelo is able to fight in two completely distinct styles and be successful at both which is evidence of high level P4P skills.
