Never have cared for this term. I see it as meaningless and also unprovable. To say for example that "if Ray Robinson was the same size as Ali, Ali would've been destroyed." This is so hypothetical, unworkable, unrealistic and totally meaningless. It's like saying "if Willie Pep had been a heavyweight", you can stop right there because noone even approaching heavyweight size could ever do half the moves Pep pulled in every fight. Every fighter has their prime/best weight, and once they leave there, it TENDS to go downhill. They may still be great and beat big names, but part of the magic is gone. So trying to figure out who was the "pound for pound" best fighter is ridiculous. Why not just say who was the best heavyweight, middleweight, welterweight and so on?
Nobody takes the term to the level of seriousness that you prescribe it - at least not anymore. The common use is a simple way to rate fighters across divisions without taking weight into consideration. Luckily, nobody uses this term in any way that matters.
there are different ways you can do the P4P list. i think the most common way to do it is who did more in their division recently. still like above said, its not that serious.
