Today I have read Internationalbut's and Rosseboi's threads arguing that resume is overstated in rankings of fighters and should be sacrificed to some degree by talent. To an extent I agree, but I have a question for those of you who believe this. What to do with fighters coming up who are talented such as Bojado and never materialize? Or fighters who get exposed badly such as Lacy? In the meantime, while they are showing high levels of talent, are you ranking them above proven yet aging vets? How does this work, seems kind of sticky.
If you're talking about tangible world rankings that affect whether someone gets a title shot and **** like that then you have to base that purely on achievement. But P4P crap is just pure hypothesis. In concept, it shouldn't necessarily require achievements and should be based solely on what you think would happen if that fighter were to compete against others when size was no factor. Essentially it's a judgement of ability, with achievements being offered as evidence to support the perceived ability. But if a person believes that someone is the best, fair enough, go ahead and rank them accordingly.
IMO, there is no argument. Resume will always be more important than talent... in relation to rankings, anyhow. You'll find the guys supporthing this *argument* are ones who favourite fighters are quite talented, but just haven't "manned" up enough. But by using this criteria, that doesn't matter. But then again, that's not to say someone with a superior resume can't lose to someone who has an inferior one. But UNTIL, and not until such time as the inferior resume defeates the superior resume, the figher with the inferior resume CAN NOT (such as 1 + 1 can equal nothin else but 2) be ranked above the superior resume.
:good the original purpose for p4p was for SRR..it basically stated that while he could/would beat every fighter from MW down he wouldnt beat the Top HW's..its saying that if the weights were equal then a fighter would beat any other fighter at any weight class
I ahve a genius idea. Why don't we line up the 50 boxers who are the top in their divisions in a stage and then let them showcase their speed using the speedball, their power with the punching bag, their speed with their shadowboxing, etc. and then ranked them as ATG based on who impressed us most. I am sure that many fans would agree because we are grading them at the same time. This is unprecedented because that is the top 50 fighters in each division all graded at the same time. We could even use devises to measure such parameters like split screen camera to compare speed, etc, etc to remove biases.