Results Are In: ESB Official Rankings

Next month, he won't even be in there after some more results. I may include Juan Diaz in the top 10 place or another.

I think nothing of him H2H, but the point is that P4P right now is not yet sorted out, so I needed a space filler that wouldn't be absurd to the overall 'criteria' that I utilise.

 

I don't even hate ****ing Hopkins. Just the way the whole world is moronic enough to rank him so highly.

The same people who will rate Calzaghe too highly if he beats Kessler.

 

There are no excuses. Guzman would have been an easy pick above Hopkins. Moved up in weight, dismantled a non-shot titlist.

 

Where will he deserve to be ranked if he blows Kessler away? You don't think that dominating Kessler would deserve a top 3 ranking?:think

 

No, Calzaghe is old, past prime. He was P4P number one from 2000/2001ish until 2006. Not top 3 now.

I won't continue ranking Calzaghe highly when he should be just to suit by agenda of pushing forward the idea Calzaghe is the best fighter of the last decade.

 

Ah, right, Guzman will definitley be in there next month.

 

Great effort guys with all the votes.
Would really like to get involved at a later stage.

 

All we know is Guzman is top 20. We also know he is above Hopkins.

 

Why was Calzaghe P4P number one from 2001-2006?

I just don't get it.

He's good, yeah...but what exactly are you using to define P4P status? "Domination" (in quotes for a reason) of a neglected division is NOT the way to P4P status, especially when he fought 2 or 3 legit contenders in 20+ title defences.

As far as H2H/skills critera go, are you forgetting that Floyd Mayweather, Jr. was blitzing from 130 to 147 during this time, and didn't lose once? He won belts in four divisions (two traditional), was undefeated, and beat VASTLY better competition than Calzaghe, and in dominating fashion.

Add in the fact that he fought VERY few "tomato cans" during this time, as opposed to Calzaghe who fought tomato cans for the entire duration between Eubanks and Lacy, and you have someone who makes Joe Calzaghe's skills dwarf in comparison.

If you consider stomping tomato cans for 20+ title defences P4P #1, then I'm suprised you don't have RJJ as your #1 GOAT. He was better at crushing cans than Calzaghe, flashier in doing so, and wasn't a slapper :good

Calzaghe is good, but there's NO WAY he could've earned P4P status when he fought two/three contenders in 10 years. Defending a shitty belt is no excuse...Andrew Golota has fought for more TITLES than Calzaghe has fought contenders, and he hasn't won a belt once!

 

P4P by it's definition is a ranking of the best fighters in the world, it is unimportant who they have faced. A list based on resumes would be "a list of the best resumes" not a P4P list. P4P should just be about the best. WHilst wins against good opponents can support this, they are nothing like the be all and end all.

Hopkins. Lost to Taylor, looked bad against Wright. It is clear he isn't one og the very, very best elite fighters now. Therefore it is laughable to put him on a P4P list.

P4P is based on how good a fighter is and that fighters weight. They are the two dimensions. Resume doesn't come into it. Hopkins doesn't come into it.



Jones should be top 5 on everyone all time P4P lists. Greatness and P4P are different however.


Everyone seems to feel the need to make the same mistakes as RING though.

 

So if a guy fights 10 scrubs and utterly dominates them. Im talking all first round KOs. Then he should be #1 p4p?

That is stupid.

Skill isnt **** unless its proven against other skilled fighters. Hense why us crazy americans using resume as part of the barometer.

To not do so is ridiculous.

We will use Hopkins to show this.

Was his win vs Trinidad dominant? A 12 round KO....

Was his win vs Powell dominant? A 1st round KO (within 30 secs)....

Going by your standards, Hopkins was ranked higher p4p by beating Powell, then Trinidad.

It doesnt make any sense. Skill is always more evident vs lesser foes.

 

You're not making any sense here. How do we define how "good" a fighter is if we don't use who they have beaten/how they were beaten? Voodoo?

We can't. Not objectively - anyone can watch the film of Calzaghe bitchslapping Lacy and claim he's a god, but the truth is Lacy was not only overhyped, but he was tailor-made for Calzaghe.

I understand your point, and I agree that Hopkins is highly overrated on these forums, at least his current-self H2H (I feel he's underrated as an ATG, though) but we have to have SOME kind of method to judge a boxer's skill. If pounding bums is good enough for you, then clearly comeback-era George Foreman is next to godliness, because he KO'd alot more of them than Calzaghe has.

If you define "skill" as "pummelling lesser opponents in showy fashion" then that's your perogative. The rest of us know the difference between cans and champions, though, and we know that a close victory, hell even a close LOSS, to a skilled fighter is infinitely more important in defining a fighter's skill level than kicking the **** out of local garbagemen.

There is NO WAY to include Calzaghe, no matter what era, in a P4P list, unless you use longevity of reign and total resume. You are opposed to using these methods, though, so I question how you rank him so highly? P4P #1 over a period of five years?

 

:good Damn good post newbie.

One thing tho....Calzaghe's competition is far underrated. He doesnt have a great resume by all means....but he does have a very good one.

 

Can it!:twisted:

He's entitled to his opinion and if he had made a list, it would have been very good. Hopefully he participates next month.

 

He is entitled to his opinion, as is Sweet Pea right?

He can have an opinion.....was given an opportunity to make his opinion count. He chose not to. Instead, he ridicules from the sideline. That isn't cool.

And you know what.....there is nothing wrong with being Americanized. I am American. I am suppose to be Americanized. We are all from different places, and basically placing a value on a person's background and where they grew up is wrong from jump. How is being Americanized any more wrong then being British, Mexican, etc?

This crap needs to cease....seriously.