I would disagree with that. Haye, Peter X2, Chagaev, Iggy, Byrd X2 at the time were all World title holders or former World title holders and all were in their prime. Then he has quite a lot of past prime former World title holders as well as a hell of a lot of top 10 ranked fighters that he has scalped that are now on his cv. If anyone else had that kind of CV in one of the lower weight classes you wouldn't be knocking it.
Joe calzaghe entered the p4p top 5 without ever beating anyone better than mikel kessler. Not that i'm knocking kessler but history has shown that dominance gets accounted for in a p4p sense. Same with pong atm.
i dont agree, i think the height thing is all relative... hearns may have had height, but look who he beat with it if wlad had beaten someone like holyfield (prime) or even a prime bowe, then you can discount his height, so far hes knocked out loads of bums, outclassing them but at the end of the day, they were mainly bums... if he was knocking out small greats, then yeh, id rank him... but thjeres to many questions over him consixdering the quality of opposition at least with vitali, we saw how he faired against lewis, allbeit an aged past it version
1. Manny Pacquiao 2. Sergio Martinez 3. Nonito Donaire 4. Wladimir Klitschko 5. Juan Manuel Marquez 6. Vitali Klitschko 7. Miguel Cotto 8. Andre Ward 9. Timothy Bradley 10. Bernard Hopkins You can't penalize the Klits for their size. If Donaire was Klit's size, he won't have his speed. The true measure is dominance.
Vitali? Wtf? What's he done lately to be ranked so highly? Peter is his best win since his comeback and that's someone wlad has already beaten himself. The other guys I have no issue with but having vitali over segura is ridiculous imo.
What everyone "should" be considering, is that if you make Wlad the same size as everyone else and adjust his power accordingly, then you'd have to adjust his speed too. This would make Wlad's jab which most will agree is at very least good and fairly quick.. blinding fast. This will make Wlad's already at very least good footwork, into exceptional footwork for a heavy. Looking at it jokingly, I think we've just made Ali. Crazy good jab, great footspeed, only throws to the head, rarely throwing an uppercut as well.
Too many replies to read them all but size is only relevant in P4P terms in relation to your division. Doesn't matter if a Heavyweight weights 200 or 300lbs.
Yes it would also make his chin more vulnerable and reduce his power. His head movement probably increases also. A lot to consider with the problem being it is all entirely subjective which is why I am more confident in including a hint of realism which is where the resume and achievements come into things. Otherwise i'd think gamboa would be in everyones top 5.
I think the problem is that people take pound for pound too literally. It should NOT be if everyone weighed the same, how would they fare, or how much skill per pound do they posess, it is how well does the individual compare to his peers in the same weight class. I think pound for pound is an unfortunate misnomer. It should be a weightclass relativity index. For example, how much better is Wladimir than the average heavyweight vs. how much better is Steve Cunningham vs. the average cruiserweight. Perhaps Wladimir is 2X as good as the average, whereas Steve Cunningham is only 1.5X. My 2 cents.
That's basically how I've always seen it, and assumed that is how everyone else saw it too. If weightclass was irrelevant in the rankings of the very best at the current time.
It's not just the heavyweights, cruiserweights are in a similar situation. For example, erdei outsluggin frag whilst weighing 178 and giving up 20 pounds would be much better than if cunningham beat frag whilst weighing the same or more. Obviously as a cruiserweight the victory means the same. But from a p4p perspective the victories are leagues apart and that has to be obvious.
Since 95, the trio of eubank, bruno and naz. I was only young then. My interest in the sport grew with lewis-tyson and later lewis-klitschko. Since then i've been an hardcore fan. Over the last few months i've began looking further into the history fighters like ruby, langford, sharkey etc. That's my brief boxing history
I used heavyweight and cruiserweight just as an example. I think you are still getting too hung up on actual weight, instead of weightCLASS. Pound for pound rankings should not be so influenced by 1 fight and instead by the body of work within the weight class with an emphasis on recent fights. If I showed up and beat Manny Pacquiao, I should NOT be considered number 1, nor even in the top 20, as I am a bum off of the street (so to speak :good). Maybe I landed a lucky punch, maybe my ugliness froze him like a deer in headlights. My next fight against Butterbean, I might lose. In all seriousness, you are now mentioning pound for pound victories, which I think is even further down the wrong path when trying to compare fighters across weight classes. By that measure, Wladimir should drop in rankings by winning, as he "Cheated" to win by being bigger, while David Haye should improve by putting up a valiant effort against an insurmountably large opponent. That certainly doesn't make sense.