Year-end pound for pound poll

Those two things are not distinctly different, but inextricably linked. You only see how good fighters are when they're up against tough competition. Yes, there are certain fighters who you can instantly tell are the goods - e.g. Lomachenko, Rigondeaux, Ward, Golovkin, et al. - but Canelo isn't one of them. He's not the same calibre of boxer as those guys so he continually has to prove himself.

 

That's basically my thinking. Each individual list may be just a pile a turnips, but if you amalgamate them all you get... a really BIG pile of turnips. Oh wait. That wasn't what you said was it? Anyways, I agree. Sort of. It was fun anyway.

 

I can instantly tell Canelo is the goods. Way more than Golovkin, for one, but that's been debated. And let be specific and not just subjectively vague : Punch variety, body punching, natural instinctual fluid boxing.

I mean look at his KO's of Amir Khan & Liam Smith. Freakin brilliant. Who had KO's that impressive in recent memory? Look how he set that up with Khan in particular. Going to the body early, getting Khan worried about the body, then feinting another body punch and surprising him up top. I mean that's 5 star punching variety skills. The reaction to that was "but it was Amir Khan, he's got a glass chin" and it's like Canelo gets no credit for that.

Then Beefy, I mean man Canelo just completely manhandled him with crippling body shots. The reaction to that was "oh but Beefy isn't world level". He beats Lara, reaction to that was "Lara really won". He fights Floyd Maywaether at a ridiculous catchweight gets a literal draw on one card vs Floyd, reaction to that was "it was a schooling" meanwhile Floyd didn't do anything except for one round when he backed Canelo up.

I mean it just seems like there's always an excuse to not give Canelo credit for huge challenges and achievements. He easily beats a future HOFer in Cotto at a Catchweight Cotto needed. Instead of "wow Canelo schooled Cotto" we get "Canelo is making a mockery of the MW title".

I mean it's unbelievable the amount of quality wins and performances Canelo has had and every time there's some excuse to not give him credit, and then this stuff gets used to keep him out of P4P lists.

The funniest thing has got to be the Golovkin comparisons. You say he's not the same caliber of guys like Golovkin so he has to prove himself. First of all I don't know what you are looking at to make that assessment. Golovkin hasn't proven himself, and hasn't been as impressive as Canelo. Golovkin's resume pales in comparison to Canelo's resume, and Golovkin hasn't had anywhere near the impressive KO's as Canelo. Rigondeaux is certainly a incredible talent, and I can't argue with having him in the P4P Top 10, I'll admit he probably deserves #9 or #10 more than Spence or maybe even Crawford, and like you said you're giving him a pass for fighting only once in each of the last 2 years against not huge names because you can instantly tell he's got the goods. Canelo in that time has fought big names like Cotto and Khan, and looked impressive in each of those fights. Then more recently just beat an undefeated champion by knockout.

I disagree that Canelo isn't the caliber of the guys you listed, I think they are all P4P caliber guys. It just seems like Canelo is being kept off people's list for not fighting certain guys while other guys on the list are only fighting once a year vs not big names. Just seems very inconsistent. And I also disagree that P4P is a nonsensical concept. I personally think it's a brilliant concept but it's just that people have hugely different criteria as to what makes up the list. To me it's about skills in the ring, pure and simple. (quality punching, quality knockouts, ability to hit and not get hit, etc) But for those who value other stuff more highly to make up a P4P list, like who you fought recently and who you beat, at least be consistent if you are going to use that criteria.

 

You forgot the Kirkland KO, the set up was also beautiful.

 

1. Kovalev
2. Lomachenko
3. Gonzalez
4. Golovkin
5. Ward
6. Rigondeaux
7. Pacquiao
8. Crawford
9. Degale
10. Fury

 

Not a bad list. We did agree to put the winner of Kov ward on top. Most people renegade though including myself

 

After much consideration I have revised my personal P4P rankings.

1.) Andre Ward
2.) Vasyl Lomachenko
3.)chocolitito Gonzalez
4.)Sergey Kovalev
5.)Terence Crawford
6.)Rigondeaux
7.)Canelo Alvarez
8.)Keith Thurman
9.)Carl Frampton
10.)Gennady Golovkin

 

Put your hardhat on.... incoming fire!

(see below)

 

Ggg hater lol

 

The rest I can understand, but Thurman over Frampton and Golovkin? He isn't as dominant as Golovkin, and he didn't move up like Frampton. Both look better than him as well.

Just my opinion of course, wondering what your reasoning is?

 

My P4P list
1 Gonzalez
2 LOMA
3 Crawford
4 Kov
5 Rigo
6 Ward
7 Pac
8 Usyk
9 inoue
10 Canelo

 

Gonzalez
Ward
Pacquaio
Kovalev
Lomachenko
GGG
Crawford
Rigondeaux
Estrada
Canelo