p4p is&always has been just a matter of personal opinion,its up to you how seriously or lightly you regard it.
Good explanation. Unfortunately almost noone uses this standard to judge fighter's abilities lb.forlb. If they did they would have to put Wlad Klitschko in their top 10 rankings but never do. Here's a long-term dominant heavyweight champion who even his detractors admit fights anybody put in front of him. He has brutalized one top ten contender after another for years now. He has unified two titles and travels internationally to fight which takes a toll on the body. Some argue the division is weak but that's beyond Wlad's control and is therefore irrelevent to the discussion. Also he has fought all styles of fighters and won against big punchers like Brewster and Peter to slick boxers like Chris Byrd and fellow giants like Thompson and Austin. Instead you see an unproven Kelly Pavlik and other fighters like Chad Dawson vaulting into many peoples's lb. for lb. rankings after one or two good performances. When people start actually using your well thought out standard of judging that so many posters seem to agree with then maybe other posters will take all pound for pound discussions more seriously.
Your point is valid but I tend to judge boxers P4P on who is the best overall athlete. In that way you could pretty rank people P4P coming from different sports.........
I agree. These P4P idiots think they are playing Dungeons and Dragons or something with this P4P crap. It is all fantasy and conjecture. If you are in the P4P top 10 in the world and you can't move up 1 weight class and win a fight it means you were NEVER P4P to begin with.
Irrelavant is probably too strong but Wlad hasn't just beat turkeys. A lot of his opponents were undefeated and ranked as number 1 when he fought them. Calvin Brock was number 1 U.S. based heavy when Wlad starched him and Wlad beat some former champs and even a co-champion in amateur standout Sergei from Russia.