Here's my go at a p4p list...

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Decebal, Feb 26, 2008.


Page 6 of 7
  1. Nestea

    Nestea Thirst Remover Full Member

    7,336
    0
    Feb 25, 2008
    Why not we make all the P4P boxers on the list do a royal rumble at the ring. That way we can all be happy. Yah feeling me guys? I know its stupid. But wow I can't imagine it....
     
    Nestea, Feb 27, 2008
    Nestea, Feb 27, 2008
    #76
  2. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    Not sure why you wrote that in reply to the paragraph you quoted...


    Huh? :huh Does it not matter whether the hall of famer was shot/faded or not? Does it not matter whether they were on form or had a bad day?

    No! It is not possible! Where did you get that from? I wrote on several occasions that this wouldn't be possible!

    Didn't I say that if Kessler beat Calzaghe in the last 10 seconds with one punch after being dominated as much as he was in their fight, he would be HIGHER than Calzaghe on the list, but Calzaghe would fall to 8-9?

    Didn't I say that if Calzaghe who fights as well as he did against Kessler is beaten by Hopkins albeit in an ugly but fair fight Hopkins should be higher than Calzaghe but Calzaghe climbs down a couple of places in the rating?

    Why are you ignoring these posts?:huh

    If the fight is fairly reffed and the result fairly given by the jugdes, sure, a win is more important than the manner of the performance, but not the only important thing! Because it's not the same whether Calzaghe lacied Lacy or whether he won a close but clear decision over him. One type of performance gets you up higher in the ratings than another - all I was saying.

    I never said it was only about how they looked the last time around! I am looking at the last couple of fights which are still significant to their likely performance in their next fight. With a 43 year-old Hopkins, his win over Trinidad is not significant AT ALL. His performance over Taylor are not very significant given his performance against Tarver or Winky in which he was even more faded. His performance against Tarver is also not as significant as his perfomance against Winky...where he was even more faded...and fighting a MW...you see how this works?

    The same does not apply to Pacquiao because he is not getting older by the day. His performance depends less on age and more on his motivation, as you have pointed out.

    Not sure why you disagree with me, McGrain!:huh
     
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    #77
  3. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    Bernard couldn't do 160 and still fight anywhere close to how he does now for 100 million dollars, these days...I think Winky would beat him at 160 convincingly. Anyway...Tarver was very much faded when he fought Hopkins...all that "man who beat the man" is just resume-worship. Still, think you have a much better list than those who put Hopkins and Winly in their top 10! I can live with your list very well.:good
     
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    #78
  4. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    I am not obsessed with p4p but I cannot swallow Hopkins being called the 4th best fighter in the world, currently. Might as well call Taylor the fourth best fighter in the world! He has a better claim than Hopkins!
     
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    #79
  5. Smith

    Smith Monzon-like Full Member

    5,953
    2
    Mar 8, 2007
    Im sorry, I just can't place Winky above Bernard, let alone in the top 20. No way. I don't think it is entirely unreasonable to place Bernard 19th also, it would take a a blind man to see he still has superb ability inside that ring. Im considering placing Jermain over him, but would need to wait until the next round of matches.
     
    Smith, Feb 27, 2008
    Smith, Feb 27, 2008
    #80
  6. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    To be honest, I don't think it makes much difference because I agree with your ratings, ball-park-wise . As I said, I can live with them very well and if The Ring used your ratings as theirs...I wouldn't even blink:good .
     
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    #81
  7. Nestea

    Nestea Thirst Remover Full Member

    7,336
    0
    Feb 25, 2008
    Fine dude! If you want that kind of list then live with it. As if I even care the P4P list. I just want to see 2 guys beat the crap out of each other.
     
    Nestea, Feb 27, 2008
    Nestea, Feb 27, 2008
    #82
  8. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    Well...I have good news: Vazquez and Marquez are fighting this weekend! Bika will fight Codrington again soon! Happy days!
     
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    #83
  9. Smith

    Smith Monzon-like Full Member

    5,953
    2
    Mar 8, 2007
    :thumbsup
     
    Smith, Feb 27, 2008
    Smith, Feb 27, 2008
    #84
  10. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,015
    48,121
    Mar 21, 2007
    YOU: It's the last performance that is the most important

    ME: No, that's not the case (provides example of one of world's best fighters turning in poor performance - but a winning one which should mean that his status should remain unaffected - unless it is enhanced by a victory in difficult circumstances).

    YOU: Not sure why you wrote that in reply to the paragraph you quoted.




    It matters, yes - but you seem to want to rank fighters POUND FOR POUND based upon their "skillsets" as those skillsets would be described by statistics (speed 9/10, technical prowess of jab 8/10 etc.) but WINNING is also a skill.

    What is your position on Hopkins? Is it that he is faded/shot? If so, how do you explain his ability to keep on winning, against ranked opponents, in spite of this?

    Mine is: he has a winning mentality. He is a winner. How he "looks" against Wright is important - how "faded/shot" - but account for these wins.



    If you say you said these things, i'm sure you did - but again, I find this contradictory with you earlier post where you set out criteria describing your possible dismissal of a Hopkins win over Calzaghe should certain criteria be met. Now tell me; if that can happen once, why can it not technically happen a second time (although I should really say third, because i'm guessing you've at least partially dismissed the win over Wright?)?

    I'm not "ignoring" those posts; i'm still trying to get you to answer my specific questions about post 57.



    Are you sure? What if the losing fighter appears to be "shot/faded"? Isn't "Lacying" an opponent pretty pointless if that fighter isn't nearly as good as he seemed to be?



    I'll assume you mean independent of factors such as the distance between Pac-JMM's first fight and their second (Their first fight being the most significant factor in deciding how each is likely to "perform" in their next fight even though it happened years ago).

    What about naturally patchy performers? Guys who are desperately inconsistent? Guys who are moving up two weight divisions? Guys who are weight drained?

    I understand the idea that a pattern may exsist in a fighers performances. Do you understand that this pattern may not be as straight forward as the one you have painted here?

    Do you understand the idea that a fighter who is technically inferior AND slower has very little available in terms of game plan and that Hopkins found the perfect one, executed it perfectly and scored a win over a p4p top 20 fighter fighting, for the first time, at a higher weight?

    Hopkins looked **** against Winky. Impossible for him to win looking good. Impossible. Does your criteria allow for this?

    :huh

    I'm not sure I understand the difference. Are you saying that ageing is tangible and irreversable (i will be happy to provide examples to the contrary if it helps) and that lack of motivation to box is...what?
     
    McGrain, Feb 27, 2008
    McGrain, Feb 27, 2008
    #85
  11. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    Phew! Thanks for your post!:good
     
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    #86
  12. PrideOfWales

    PrideOfWales Winston Zedmore Full Member

    11,684
    1
    Apr 20, 2006
    PrideOfWales, Feb 27, 2008
    PrideOfWales, Feb 27, 2008
    #87
  13. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    Looks like Calzaghe has no chance against Hopkins...:think
     
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    Decebal, Feb 27, 2008
    #88
  14. 196osh

    196osh Mendes Bros. Full Member

    14,565
    11
    May 10, 2007
    It is utter **** and they will look ******ed as **** when number 10 does a number on number 4, :yep
     
    196osh, Feb 27, 2008
    196osh, Feb 27, 2008
    #89
  15. randeris

    randeris Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,339
    0
    Nov 20, 2007
    1. Mayweather
    2. Pacman
    3. Calzaghe
    4. Cotto
    5. JMM
    6. Hopkins
    7. Pavlik
    8. Vasquez
    9. Marquez
    10. Wlad
    11. Juan Diaz
    12. Joan Guzman
    13. Kessler
    14. Chris John
    15. Winky Wright
     
    randeris, Feb 27, 2008
    randeris, Feb 27, 2008
    #90
Page 6 of 7