New Ring P4P rankings: Wladimir Klitschko moved up to #2

It seems to me that P4P now means, "Most popular fighters" instead of "Who would be the best if everyone were the same size?".

 

Exactly. Imagine bringing Christy Martin into a debate about Ricardo Lopez? What kind of moron does that? :yep

 

I remember seeing a member on another site's P4P list, where he listed Carl Froch ahead of Floyd. That makes me think that the poster made his list based on the fighters he likes most.

If Floyd and Froch were the same size, which is what P4P is for, Floyd would dominate Froch.

 

Yes and read my initial post, he was often overlooked for lesser talented fighters.

So what your saying is that if a fighter of lesser talent who makes more money and gets more air time than Lopez does not equate to Lopez being overlooked?

Not once have I said he wasn't appreciated by the diehards or experts.

How can you not understand any of this?

What's the matter still crying over the fact your 'late 90's era is great bull****' is bit by bit gathering ground and people are actually realising idiots like you are just yank haters.

 

Less talented or not they were more proven against better opposition, and thats how p4p is based. You're obviously not intelligent enough to understand this. By the way, trying to bait me with misdirection in your second paragraph isnt going to get you off the hook! You're a moron and everyone knows this! :rofl

 

David Haye is a possible Hall of Famer.

 

No, he's not. His best wins are Valuev, old Ruiz, and Chisora, who's lost every time he's stepped up.

 

He would probably get in on his Cruiserweight accomplishments.

 

Really?

I'm the moron?

Says the poster who is readily known to post moronic "facts".

Ok, there's people out there who I actually care about what they think of me, you are not one :hi:

Now if you think Junior Jones, Norris and Moseley had done more in the late 90's then that's your opinion.

But if you could bottle up Lopez's skills and pit them against fighters throughout the weights you wouldn't favour many fighters above him.

 

Yes you're a moron. Anybody who tries to use Christy Martin in a debate about why Lopez wasnt ranked higher p4p is a grade A idiot. Whats next, you running to the defense of Sven Ottke and why he wasnt rated higher p4p? And you obviously care what i think or you wouldnt bring my name up in every thread or even respond to me if you didnt. Your arguments are weak son, and your misdirection weaker! Get back to blaming Americans for all your problems, its much more amusing!!

Ps - was Norris really rated higher any time both he and Lopez were in the top 10? I havent bothered to look but i bet i could disect that argument to! :yep

 

1997 now let's see you dissect it. Not that you've actually dissected anything.

Points here ;

I said smaller fighters are often overlooked. Now, should a female fighter have a better billing than a fighter of the quality like Lopez?

Should the same female fighter make more money than a top 10 pound for pound fighter like finito Lopez?

Now both scenarios happened therefore my pedigree chum Lopez is getting devalued and overlooked in the grand scheme of things. Surely even you a pillock with 1 brain cell can realise this.

If Lopez was a middleweight upwards he'd of been a superstar.

Like I said looking forward to your dissection

 

Even if you were correct (which is up for discussion) -- I contend that talent (i.e. talent given by birth) is quite irrelevant as a determinant of the performance for athletes.

Wlad Klitschko is not dominant for years because he's talented. He's dominant because he puts insane hours, blood, sweat and tears into his profession. Much more than his opponents. Just like other athletes or leading performing artists who are at the top in their field. There is scientific research on the significance of talent as a determinant for success and the consensus it that its effects is negligible. I think we had this discussion before, I suggested you the book "The Talent Code", you can find it on amazon. "The Talent Code: Greatness Isn't Born. It's Grown."

So even if you say previous eras were more talented -- even if that assumption were true? It means next to nothing.

 

Talent means nothing by itself. There are plenty of talented fighters who didn't achieve much in the sport, or didn't achieve as much as they could have.

You need the mental toughness and work ethic to go with that talent.

Floyd is a great example of someone with talent AND a great work ethic. Fighters like him spend hours perfecting their craft.

 

This is a very good post MB, and i agree with much of it. I think i may even buy the book you suggested. That said i will rephrase my position of talent to earlier era's being more dedicacated and making the most of their talent instead of just more talented.

 

Yes, a female should have a better billing than a fighter like Lopez so long as it makes the promoter more money. This is a business, kid. Should Butterbean have made more money? Im sure he did and he was a circus act. But he was an easy sell and thats why promoters go into business. That said, Lopez has never been overlooked or devalued by boxing pundits and experts, and theyre the ones who are deciding p4p more times than not. Now if Christy Martin, Butterbean or Sven Ottke ranked higher you may have a point. As it stands, you dont.

You're welcome for the education. :yep