Say Pavlik Beats Calzaghe, Is He Your #1 P4P?

Yes, but a lot of those people have now revised their opinions. As I posted to the other guy, that either indicates that they believe Taylor has declined or that they have realised that their ranking of him was too high.

 

If I'm moving a man down the rankings, all that indicates is that either he lossed or someone below him in the rankings had a win to justify such a shift. Don't look into it so much.

 

yep 5-6 is dead on

 

:good

That would be such a trip. After loyally following him the last couple years, even wondering if he'd ever get a title shot, to having a "possibility" of being considered for # 1 P4P! Good stuff.

 

I wouln't personally, if he fights DLH and Hatton again then i'd move him down, but it also depends on the other top P4P fighters, if Manny has sucess at Lightweight then he's definate P4P No1

 

Not at all.

At the time, such a ranking of Taylor was justified by his victories over Bernard Hopkins, Corey Spinks, and his competitive draw with Winky Wright. The man was an undefeated champion, he deserves to be in the rankings.

If you then lose two fights, one by knockout, how could you possibly rate the man in the top 10? That's how it works from my understanding.

 

You're saying that your pound for pound rankings aren't a reflection of who you think the pound for pound best fighters in the World are? Ok :?

 

Great post.:yep

 

He can move up, just not to no.1. You can't simply ignore the accomplishments of a Mayweather or a Pacquiao. Those two have been doing it for years. Furthermore, Cotto has also been improving rapidly and has also been fighting some good comp. Logically speaking, I see no reason to discount what these fighters have done and leapfrog Pavlik above them based on him beating an aging fighter.

I think Mayweather and Pac have both been getting underrated on this board(and please don't tell me about a couple of fanactical fans of either fighter as to why they are overrated instead of underrated. I discount the fanatical haters and huggers when I assess whether or not a fighter is over or underrated.) Both are extremely talented, have accomplished a lot in this sport and have taken on some good comp.

They both derseve to keep their rankings until they lose. As a Mayweather fan, I do get a kick out of all the anti-Mayweather rhetoric on this board, and don't even mind people saying he should be dropped in the rankings because that sentiment will be reversed relatively shortly. It seems as though people don't realize just what a special talent he is. It's all good though, they'll all be reminded just how good he is once he beats Cotto in impressive fashion. I'm extremely confident that fight will come off and even more confident of a Floyd victory. So you can put Pavlik or whomever you want ahead of Floyd for the time being. However, no way does Pavlik deserve to be no. 1.

 

I totally agree with you.

Luckily for Pavlik, I rate fighters on how they perform against other great fighters. That is what Boxing is about. Forget money and fame, and how good a fighter looks against a bum. It's all about how they do against other great fighters. That's the only way you can evaluate a man's quality. Fighters in the past have had the ability to be greatet than they actually turned out, but circumstances tainted that.

 

No. :huh

The only way you can assess how good a fighter is, is to see how well they do against great opposition. Why is this an issue? Taylor beat great fighters, he was a p4p top 10. He then lossed consecutively, once by knockout, he isn't top 10 any longer. What is the issue here?

 

Precisely. I don't take P4P lists seriously, anyway. I just think they are in good fun, a fun way to assess the elite in the game.

I think everyone agrees Mayweather is number one, with Pacquiao a pretty close second. Third, I don't know, maybe Calzaghe? Yes, I'll say Calzaghe. :yep