The 12 Fighters In Boxing History Who Made The Ring's #1 PFP Spot

Nopporn · Sep 27, 2017

escudo said: ↑

He's got 3 marquee wins under his belt. KO'ed an undefeated Gamboa, Destroyed Indongo's liver and dominated an undefeated Postol knocking him down twice. All great wins all dominant performances over seriously good prospects, the latter two were a weight class up. He's going up another weight class soon. If he becomes an undefeated 3 division champ with a 72% KO ratio (so far) how can you possibly argue that GGG has a better resume?
Click to expand...

3 fighters you mentioned their names above are not big enough to say that Crawford is now the best fighter. If he beats Thurman, Pacquiao, Brook, Danny Gracia, and Porter then I'll have no doubt in my mind. I like Crawford but he's not the best P4P now.

escudo · Sep 27, 2017

Nopporn said: ↑

3 fighters you mentioned their names above are not big enough to say that Crawford is now the best fighter. If he beats Thurman, Pacquiao, Brook, Danny Gracia, and Porter then I'll have no doubt in my mind.
Click to expand...

Oh of course he's got more work to do but he's doing it 2 weight classes above where he started already. I rate his resume just a hair better than GGG's at this point.

pincai · Sep 27, 2017

GK BOX said: ↑

Where Crawford and Loma exceed in talent, GGG compensates in his chin, power, and straight toughness
Click to expand...

True, tough to beat combination. You forgot solid fundamentals

shadow111 · Sep 27, 2017

So G is Ring's P4P #1 and Canelo is Ring's Middleweight Champion.

P4P has been so dumbed down it's not even funny. P4P is supposed to be about skills and I don't see how you can rate G that much higher than Canelo after the fight we have just observed. In terms of P4P, G couldn't hurt, knockdown, or stop Canelo. If someone has truly devastating punching power, I could see them being P4P #1 based on that, but in the last two fights G has proved that he doesn't have that kind of devastating knockout power. That was the reason why he was ranked so highly in terms of P4P to begin with. It certainly wasn't due to his boxing skill, it was because of his knockout streak, his feared devasating power. Well he didn't do anything to bother Canelo, Canelo took his best shots and was unfazed by them. I just think in general fans and media alike have forgotten what P4P really is.

At least this P4P list should put to bed the claim that some have made that Oscar De La Hoya runs Ring Magazine. I just don't see how G fans can on the one hand mock Canelo being Ring Middleweight Champion acting like that means nothing but then turn around and laud Ring's P4P list now that G is #1.

BundiniBlack · Sep 27, 2017

Whitaker Mosley and DLH should of never been P4P #1 it should of been Roy for 9 or 10 years straight from when he beat Toney to when he lost to Tarver

BundiniBlack · Sep 27, 2017

Whitaker Mosley and DLH should of never been P4P #1 it should of been Roy for 9 or 10 years straight from when he beat Toney to when he lost to Tarver

OvidsExile · Sep 27, 2017

Tyson
Leonard
Hagler
Leonard
Duran
Monzon
Napoles
Ali
Griffith
Ortiz
Jofre
Moore
Perez
Saddler
Robinson
Charles
Pep
Louis
Armstrong
Ross
Canzoneri
Walker
Tunney
Greb
Leonard
Kilbane
Wilde
Langford
Gans

pincai · Sep 27, 2017

OvidsExile said: ↑

I don't know. It looks about the same to me. All of those guys with the exception of Shane are great fighters, although Golovkin is probably on the lower side of the scale. I can't decide if he's as good as Kostya Tszyu or a little better. Really, he's not going to be there long since he'll probably retire after the rematch next year and they'll elevate Lomachenko.

Bernard probably wasn't #1 at any time even though he's an ATG. If he was ever top dog it was likely convenient timing because even in his heyday Barrera, Morales, and Calzaghe were probably doing better work. But they'd pick up a loss or something and duck below a few of the other p4pers they were better than. That's a problem with the p4p list, it's volatile nature. Just one loss will send a great fighter tumbling down the charts. It seems to reward not losing more than winning great victories.

That's probably why it had Floyd Mayweather top for about five years when he wasn't doing the best work. From 2012 on Donaire, Ward, Rigondeaux, Gonzalez, and Lomachenko were all better for a period. But everyone is reluctant to move a guy down to make way for new blood if he doesn't have an official loss on his record. It's got a very conservative structure and the list makers really like to place their bets on the well known well established safe commodities in the sport. You often have to win for a long time before they'll add you, and when they finally add you, you are past your best, declining, on the brink of failure, and you tumble right off. That's what happened when they finally put Klitschko, Uchiyama, Yamanaka, and Gonzalez on there just in recent memory. I guess that's better than when they jump the gun and declare the likes of Broner, Guerrero, and Lopez to be p4p quality.

It's such a weird list when you look at it. I mean the times when a guy goes in. I think Ward should have gone in, but probably around the time he won the super six or beat Chad Dawson, not after those two controversial "victories" over Kovalev. It's sort of the same thing for Golovkin. I know he's finally got a great win on his resume, but he was better two and three years ago. It would seem cruel to move Golovkin down for a diminished performance when at the same time it was his greatest achievement to date, but the p4p list is a little cruel anyway the way it treats fighters with controversial losses. Think of how Kovalev got lowered after everyone thought that he beat Ward. And Mosley goes up or stays up, even though everyone thinks he lost the second De La Hoya fight.

I'm puzzled by the thread starters list though. I really didn't think that Hopkins ever hit #1 and I thought Calzaghe was Ring's guy around 2008 after he beat B-Hop and Jones before he retired.
Click to expand...

Good points. I'm not too much into p4p, nothing is ever concrete and too subjective.
The list presented by OP doesn't seems right though as you pointed out.

Rock0052 · Sep 27, 2017

escudo said: ↑

He's got 3 marquee wins under his belt. KO'ed an undefeated Gamboa, Destroyed Indongo's liver and dominated an undefeated Postol knocking him down twice. All great wins all dominant performances over seriously good prospects, the latter two were a weight class up. He's going up another weight class soon. If he becomes an undefeated 3 division champ with a 72% KO ratio (so far) how can you possibly argue that GGG has a better resume?
Click to expand...

I'm a massive Bud fan, but resume isn't why I rate him as high as I do.

Gamboa, Indongo, & Postol vs Lemieux, Jacobs, and Canelo?

The latter are more dangerous fights & better competition, and it's not a particularly tough conclusion to reach.

Bud will take over 147 and is a H2H beast.

NewBoxingOrder · Sep 27, 2017

OvidsExile said: ↑

I'm puzzled by the thread starters list though. I really didn't think that Hopkins ever hit #1 and I thought Calzaghe was Ring's guy around 2008 after he beat B-Hop and Jones before he retired.
Click to expand...

Read it for yourself.

Ring list of 10 men who have been pound-for-pound #1 from 1989-2015
Nov 10, 2015.
https://www.ringtv.com/403193-the-ring-pound-for-pound-history-from-iron-mike-to-chocolatito/

Gonzalez was #1 for Ring from around September 22, 2015 to March 21, 2017.
* Moves to #1 -----> http://www.ibtimes.com/boxing-news-2015-floyd-mayweather-gone-theres-new-pound-pound-king-2107404
* Replaced at #1 by Ward ----> https://www.ringtv.com/490238-ring-ratings-update-new-pound-pound-no-1/

Ward reign as Ring #1 P4P ends as he retires and is replaced by GGG.
https://www.ringtv.com/518604-ring-ratings-update-andre-wards-departure-causes-waves/

I believe that the highest Calzaghe got on the list was #2 or #3. Here you can see that Ring put him at year-end #3 in 2008.
http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_2008

I think that Pacquiao was #1 in the Ring rankings from 2008 to 2010 (and I think even longer than this; I believe Pac was #1 until 2012). Which, I guess, would mean that he held that spot over Calzaghe in 2008.

The only thing I got wrong in the original post was the dates for the fighters' reigns. So I removed the dates of all but the last three fighters.

The list of the fighters, however, was correct and complete.

NewBoxingOrder · Sep 28, 2017

Calzaghe got as high as #2 on Ring's list. That was in June 2008, after Floyd retired (at that time). Pacquiao was #1 then.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...Joe-Calzaghe-awarded-CBE-in-Honours-list.html

I think Calzaghe held that spot until he retired in Feb 2009, but I'm not sure. He may have dropped down to #3 before he retired.

NewBoxingOrder · Sep 28, 2017

pincai said: ↑

I tend to agree that both Loma and Crawford are more talented than GGG.
Click to expand...

Golovkin has an incredible amount of ability and skill. Unfortunately for him, he is in clear physical decline at this point.

That physical decline has made Golovkin look significantly worse than he looked at his peak.

Is he as talented as someone like Lomachenko? No. But GGG is still unbelievably skilled and talented. He's just on the downside.

qwertyblahblah · Sep 28, 2017

shadow111 said: ↑

So G is Ring's P4P #1 and Canelo is Ring's Middleweight Champion.

P4P has been so dumbed down it's not even funny. P4P is supposed to be about skills and I don't see how you can rate G that much higher than Canelo after the fight we have just observed. In terms of P4P, G couldn't hurt, knockdown, or stop Canelo. If someone has truly devastating punching power, I could see them being P4P #1 based on that, but in the last two fights G has proved that he doesn't have that kind of devastating knockout power. That was the reason why he was ranked so highly in terms of P4P to begin with. It certainly wasn't due to his boxing skill, it was because of his knockout streak, his feared devasating power. Well he didn't do anything to bother Canelo, Canelo took his best shots and was unfazed by them. I just think in general fans and media alike have forgotten what P4P really is.

At least this P4P list should put to bed the claim that some have made that Oscar De La Hoya runs Ring Magazine. I just don't see how G fans can on the one hand mock Canelo being Ring Middleweight Champion acting like that means nothing but then turn around and laud Ring's P4P list now that G is #1.
Click to expand...

Yes! P4P has stupidly become nothing more than a resume measuring contest. Or I guess most recent fight prestige measuring contest, because it's not like Golovkin's resume overall is that hot. It's supposed to be about skill, and dominance. A guy whose best assets were nullified and debatably lost his last two fights is not p4p number 1, no way. When have we debated whether Crawford lost a fight? Or Rigondeaux? Or Mikey Garcia? Or Inoue? Or since the Salido fight Lomachenko?

Also, regardless where they have Golovkin, how can they have Canelo five spots below him? They had Ward and Kovalev 1 and 2 after their first fight.

qwertyblahblah · Sep 28, 2017

NewBoxingOrder said: ↑

Golovkin has an incredible amount of ability and skill. Unfortunately for him, he is in clear physical decline at this point.

That physical decline has made Golovkin look significantly worse than he looked at his peak.

Is he as talented as someone like Lomachenko? No. But GGG is still unbelievably skilled and talented. He's just on the downside.
Click to expand...

If you attribute Golovkin's recent performances to physical decline rather than skill, which I don't, that should affect his p4p standing too.

NewBoxingOrder · Sep 28, 2017

qwertyblahblah said: ↑

If you attribute Golovkin's recent performances to physical decline rather than skill, which I don't, that should affect his p4p standing too.
Click to expand...

He is clearly in physical decline.

There are two competing arguments about Golovkin now.

1. Golovkin is in physical decline, which is why guys will finally fight him. (opponents have seen GGG's decline for themselves and feel emboldened)

2. Golovkin has "finally" stepped up in competition, and that's why he looks relatively worse.

#1 is without question the truth. Anyone who has watched GGG over his career can see the slippage. It's pretty noticeable, as Lampley pointed out after the Canelo fight.

Even though GGG has declined, he's still the best fighter in the world. He easily handled Canelo but was jobbed on the cards. It happens, like Pac-Bradley 1 or Ward-Kovalev 1.

Log in or Sign up

The 12 Fighters In Boxing History Who Made The Ring's #1 PFP Spot

Nopporn Boxing Junkie Full Member

escudo Boxing Addict Full Member

pincai The Indonesian Thin Man Full Member

shadow111 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

BundiniBlack Well-Known Member Full Member

BundiniBlack Well-Known Member Full Member

OvidsExile At a minimum, a huckleberry over your persimmon. Full Member

pincai The Indonesian Thin Man Full Member

Rock0052 Loyal Member Full Member

NewBoxingOrder Boxing Addict Full Member

NewBoxingOrder Boxing Addict Full Member

NewBoxingOrder Boxing Addict Full Member

qwertyblahblah Boxing Addict Full Member

qwertyblahblah Boxing Addict Full Member

NewBoxingOrder Boxing Addict Full Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

The 12 Fighters In Boxing History Who Made The Ring's #1 PFP Spot

Nopporn Boxing Junkie Full Member

escudo Boxing Addict Full Member

pincai The Indonesian Thin Man Full Member

shadow111 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

BundiniBlack Well-Known Member Full Member

BundiniBlack Well-Known Member Full Member

OvidsExile At a minimum, a huckleberry over your persimmon. Full Member

pincai The Indonesian Thin Man Full Member

Rock0052 Loyal Member Full Member

NewBoxingOrder Boxing Addict Full Member

NewBoxingOrder Boxing Addict Full Member

NewBoxingOrder Boxing Addict Full Member

qwertyblahblah Boxing Addict Full Member

qwertyblahblah Boxing Addict Full Member

NewBoxingOrder Boxing Addict Full Member