The British can't break through the barrier ... WHY ?

Evander · Post by **Evander** » 12 Sep 2006, 02:22

After all these years the British cannot break through and capture the pound for pound crown ?

Population ?

Honeyghan
Lewis
Sibson
Minter
Sibson
McDonell
Hamed
Benn
Graham
Eubank
Calzaghe
Hatton

All of them great fighters.

Why ?

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 12 Sep 2006, 04:52

Hamed should have been higher imo, he dominated Featherweights more impressively than Tyszu or BHOPs dominated there divisions. Never has a fighters achievements been disregarded because of 1 loss to another great fighter.

McCellan was top6 when he fought Benn. Benn ko's him in 1 of the greatest wars ever and never got put top10.

Eubank - no didnt go after the big fights. But beating Benn/Watson/Rochaiagini and going undefeated maybe should have got him a top10 spot if RJJ got no1 for BHOPs and Toney.

Collins (not British) - should have got a top10.

Holyfield and Tyson both broke P4P lists, I dont think Lennox LEwis ever did despite beating every man he ever faced without ducking anyone

Having said all this we haven't had anyone worthy of P4P NO1. Hamed could have been with his talent but he never capitalised. If Hatton beat PBF, Cotto, Corrales, Castillo he would be P4P no1.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 12 Sep 2006, 04:58

Terence wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:Hamed should have been higher imo, he dominated Featherweights more impressively than Tyszu or BHOPs dominated there divisions. Never has a fighters achievements been disregarded because of 1 loss to another great fighter.

McCellan was top6 when he fought Benn. Benn ko's him in 1 of the greatest wars ever and never got put top10.

Eubank - no didnt go after the big fights. But beating Benn/Watson/Rochaiagini and going undefeated maybe should have got him a top10 spot if RJJ got no1 for BHOPs and Toney.

Collins (not British) - should have got a top10.

Holyfield and Tyson both broke P4P lists, I dont think Lennox LEwis ever did despite beating every man he ever faced without ducking anyone
Lewis got 9th by the Ring I think after beating Tyson, although clearly he was past his prime.

I can't see Collins getting a spot, he beat Benn and Eubank but they were not highly rated and Benn had long cashed in that McClellan win.

Shouldn't Benn/Eubank/Collins have been rated higher though, not top5 but 10ers at their peaks.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 12 Sep 2006, 06:31

fornicate p4p, if Calzaghe was american he'd be higher as Floyd hasn't fought no P4p, yet he's there on talent.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 12 Sep 2006, 06:44

Most P4P ratings are written and read by Americans.

Consider this, Diego Corralles was in the top 10 P4P of most writers, and yet if you look at his career he has been beaten by the top fighters he has faced as often as won, and is hardly the most skilful.

Nigel Benn for me is a comparable fighter. Easily hurt, but extremely dangerous and the heart of a lion, yet Benn never made it into the P4P top 10, because most Americans had never heard of him until he beat McClellan.

Slapsie Maxie · Post by **Slapsie Maxie** » 12 Sep 2006, 07:53

I am not sure I agree, James

I was spending a lot of time in the US then and a great deal of it with people who knew boxing. They knew NB because of the Dewitt and barkley fights too.

granted he was not known before he went over there and did the passport rippy up thingy ( was it that or his BBofC licence, can't recall ) but they knew him.

he was certainly known to a wider more casual boxing fan after GMc, but the fight fans knew all about him

The point is well made though that the P4P is generally a US assessment of a fighter and they are notoriously insular and I am sure this country is not the only one that could have such a conversation

Slapsie

SticknMove · Post by **SticknMove** » 12 Sep 2006, 08:38

Who was the last non American fighter to be considered P4P no1? I cant remember if there has ever been one, which sums it up really.

You could make a strong case for Pacman being the current P4P no.1 simply because of his tko wins against future HoFs Barrera and Morales.

TerribleTerry · Post by **TerribleTerry** » 12 Sep 2006, 09:32

SticknMove wrote:Who was the last non American fighter to be considered P4P no1? I cant remember if there has ever been one, which sums it up really.

You could make a strong case for Pacman being the current P4P no.1 simply because of his tko wins against future HoFs Barrera and Morales.

JC Chavez was certainly astride the P4P rankings for a time. Although, as a mexican who plied his trade in the US on Don King shows, he can virtually be thought of as American...

Old bones Ian · Post by **Old bones Ian** » 12 Sep 2006, 09:37

longevity may come into it a bit , If your a boxer from outside the US then by the time you start to get recognition you may have already peaked, boxers like Honeyghan , Hamed Etc once getting to the heights were not there long enough to get appreciated by the US .

Also at the time of Honeyghan you had Starling, Hamed you had Barrera/ Morales, Benn/Eubank you had Jones Jnr/Toney , Lewis you had Bowe.

and none of these fight were either won by the British guy or the fights were never made.

salaco · Post by **salaco** » 12 Sep 2006, 09:42

I would agree that p4p 5-10 is often colored by insularity in american lists but any higher and it is, yes, usually americans who occupy those places, mostly because they fight quality opposition more consistently

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 12 Sep 2006, 09:43

topper123 wrote:longevity may come into it a bit , If your a boxer from outside the US then by the time you start to get recognition you may have already peaked, boxers like Honeyghan , Hamed Etc once getting to the heights were not there long enough to get appreciated by the US .

Also at the time of Honeyghan you had Starling, Hamed you had Barrera/ Morales, Benn/Eubank you had Jones Jnr/Toney , Lewis you had Bowe.

and none of these fight were either won by the British guy or the fights were never made.

Very few big fights take place with British fighters. Most of the time, you guys have your domestic disputes, which of course would sway opinions in your country. I was reading another forum talking about how good Calzaghe looked against Minton (sp?) and BJ Edwards....and those guys combined for 49 career losses. It seems you guys grab hold of decent fighters when they win a big domestic fight, but there is a serious lacking of major wins on the world scene. I mean come on, it took Calzaghe 41 fights predominantly in 1 weight class to unify the belts, where it took Hatton 2. However, it took Hatton 38 fights to get the first major belt.

It's very true we don't get your guys over here until near the end, but that can be looked at both ways. While America is salivating over Mayweather/Judah, Mosley/Vargas, and Morales/Pac, British fighters don't bring in big international names often enough to get a look from us.

Lacy, Tszyu, and Johnson are the three biggest non-Brits to fight there in the last 2 years...and only one was on the p4p top 10 in 2005.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 12 Sep 2006, 10:12

Lewis- p4p is not for heavyweights. The main intention was to give guys like SR Robinson a chance to be considered best in the sport, even though it was obvious that Joe Louis would have creamed him. That was the reason, to give non-heavyweights distinction.

SticknMove · Post by **SticknMove** » 12 Sep 2006, 10:22

TerribleTerry wrote:
SticknMove wrote:Who was the last non American fighter to be considered P4P no1? I cant remember if there has ever been one, which sums it up really.

You could make a strong case for Pacman being the current P4P no.1 simply because of his tko wins against future HoFs Barrera and Morales.
JC Chavez was certainly astride the P4P rankings for a time. Although, as a mexican who plied his trade in the US on Don King shows, he can virtually be thought of as American...

I'm sure that Chavez must have been P4P No1 at his peak, possibly after he beat Taylor. I don't think he would appreciate being classed as an American though.

It certainly seems to be the case that any good world champ that has aspirations of being a P4P great has to ply his trade at the very top in the U.S. over a period of career defining fights. Nowadays that seems to include winning multiple titles at different weights.

BTW not trying to make a case for any British fighter being rated highly in these subjective rankings for all the reasons the last couple of posts have pointed out.

TerribleTerry · Post by **TerribleTerry** » 12 Sep 2006, 10:34

Terence wrote:
viciousmaussa wrote:Lewis- p4p is not for heavyweights. The main intention was to give guys like SR Robinson a chance to be considered best in the sport, even though it was obvious that Joe Louis would have creamed him. That was the reason, to give non-heavyweights distinction.
No. Lewis did make the P4P list. It is way of levelling the playing field and assessing guys based on skills, you are partly there but the fact is that Lewis did get ranked and in his day Ali would be in there. It is open to all as long as your skills/resume is top-notch.

You are both right to a certain extent - it just depends how you define p4p (a fairly nebulus conceot to start with)

Some, like Dougie Fischer at Maxbox, exclude heavies from the reconing. Other dont. I can remember Tyson, Holyfield and Lewis all making the Ring top ten p4p at one time or another.

TerribleTerry · Post by **TerribleTerry** » 12 Sep 2006, 10:37

SticknMove wrote:
TerribleTerry wrote:
SticknMove wrote:Who was the last non American fighter to be considered P4P no1? I cant remember if there has ever been one, which sums it up really.

You could make a strong case for Pacman being the current P4P no.1 simply because of his tko wins against future HoFs Barrera and Morales.
JC Chavez was certainly astride the P4P rankings for a time. Although, as a mexican who plied his trade in the US on Don King shows, he can virtually be thought of as American...
I'm sure that Chavez must have been P4P No1 at his peak, possibly after he beat Taylor. I don't think he would appreciate being classed as an American though.

I am sure that The Lion of Culiacan would have baulked at the idea of being described as an american too!!

The point I was making that his profile in the states, coupled with the fact that all his big fights took place there, meant that we could effectively group him in with the septics when considering the point of a p4p stalwart would didnt come from north america.

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 12 Sep 2006, 10:38

TerribleTerry wrote:
Terence wrote:
viciousmaussa wrote:Lewis- p4p is not for heavyweights. The main intention was to give guys like SR Robinson a chance to be considered best in the sport, even though it was obvious that Joe Louis would have creamed him. That was the reason, to give non-heavyweights distinction.
No. Lewis did make the P4P list. It is way of levelling the playing field and assessing guys based on skills, you are partly there but the fact is that Lewis did get ranked and in his day Ali would be in there. It is open to all as long as your skills/resume is top-notch.
You are both right to a certain extent - it just depends how you define p4p (a fairly nebulus conceot to start with)

Some, like Dougie Fischer at Maxbox, exclude heavies from the reconing. Other dont. I can remember Tyson, Holyfield and Lewis all making the Ring top ten p4p at one time or another.

Dougie Fischer is the biggest girl in boxing. He talks loads of crap about Mayweather, gets confronted by Roger at an event, completely cowers to him, and then goes back Monday to doing the same shit.

That, and he would felate Margarito the very first chance he gets.

Excluding HW now is completely understandable, but Lewis was definitely top 10.

SticknMove · Post by **SticknMove** » 12 Sep 2006, 11:31

Terence wrote:
That, and he would felate Margarito the very first chance he gets.
Well as long as he brushes afterwards, we've all moved into a more tolerant zone since 'Split-Kippers Mountain'.

P4P lists are a pain in the arse and pretty unwieldy. It is best to have a fair idea, and defence, of the best three fighters in boxing rather than P4P which in many ways is like those Channel Four polls where this months flavour prevails.

I totally agree. P4P lists are redundant nowadays, especially as we would find it difficult to agree who's no1 in every weight division.

lvlarc · Post by **lvlarc** » 12 Sep 2006, 11:46

If Manny Pacquiao was American, he would be the Ring's #1

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 12 Sep 2006, 11:50

lvlarc_uk wrote:If Manny Pacquiao was American, he would be the Ring's #1

You guys are blowing the whole nationalism thing out of the water. Where do the biggest fights occur? Las Vegas and NY. Who more often then not, is taking part in these fights? Americans. It may just be a numbers thing or whatever, but Americans are notoriously part of almost every big fight within a year, thus they get the benefit of the doubt for that.

The best fight of the year had no Americans in it, and hardly any of the boxing world has mentioned it for more than a paragraph. Not England, not South Africa, not Germany, not anyone.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 12 Sep 2006, 12:22

Terence wrote:
viciousmaussa wrote:Lewis- p4p is not for heavyweights. The main intention was to give guys like SR Robinson a chance to be considered best in the sport, even though it was obvious that Joe Louis would have creamed him. That was the reason, to give non-heavyweights distinction.
No. Lewis did make the P4P list. It is way of levelling the playing field and assessing guys based on skills, you are partly there but the fact is that Lewis did get ranked and in his day Ali would be in there. It is open to all as long as your skills/resume is top-notch.

whether he did or he didn't, it doesn't matter. the original reasoning behind the p4p debate was wholly for the reason i referred to. that is the way the phrase was coined in the 40s or 50s. in the purest sense, that it what it comes down to. it was really so that Jake Lamotta wouldn't keep crying over not being "able to beat Joe Louis" (lol, in the film at least)

nowadays "pound for pound" is a cliche that is hideously overused. How many tmes have we heard ppl say that so and so is "pound for pound the best middleweight in the world"?

Currently Lorenzo Parra is starting to look head & shoulders above everyone, but Venezuelan flyweights who whip their challengers on the road in places like PR & Japan don't necessarily get recognized.

being the undisputed heavyweight champ is a distincion all its own. The absence of Lewis - or someone of his calibre - shows a heavyweight king is as important as a p4p king.

SticknMove · Post by **SticknMove** » 12 Sep 2006, 12:25

Mattyp151 wrote:
lvlarc_uk wrote:If Manny Pacquiao was American, he would be the Ring's #1
You guys are blowing the whole nationalism thing out of the water. Where do the biggest fights occur? Las Vegas and NY. Who more often then not, is taking part in these fights? Americans. It may just be a numbers thing or whatever, but Americans are notoriously part of almost every big fight within a year, thus they get the benefit of the doubt for that.

The best fight of the year had no Americans in it, and hardly any of the boxing world has mentioned it for more than a paragraph. Not England, not South Africa, not Germany, not anyone.

As I said in a earlier post, to be considered at the top of the P4P list it seems a top overseas world champ has to ply his trade in the U.S. with career defining fights over a period of time. It's about money producing the fights that people want to see and making them possible. Like it or not this is the reality.

Given that PBF hasn't proved himself the best LWW or WW in the world makes these P4P lists pointless. He is being judged on his talent alone.

Whereas Pacman has beaten 2 future HoFs (Barrera and Morales) by TKO and still has PBF and Winky ahead of him in the Ring magazine's P4P list. IMO this is a bias shown in favour of home grown American fighters.

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 12 Sep 2006, 13:24

SticknMove wrote:
Mattyp151 wrote:
lvlarc_uk wrote:If Manny Pacquiao was American, he would be the Ring's #1
You guys are blowing the whole nationalism thing out of the water. Where do the biggest fights occur? Las Vegas and NY. Who more often then not, is taking part in these fights? Americans. It may just be a numbers thing or whatever, but Americans are notoriously part of almost every big fight within a year, thus they get the benefit of the doubt for that.

The best fight of the year had no Americans in it, and hardly any of the boxing world has mentioned it for more than a paragraph. Not England, not South Africa, not Germany, not anyone.
As I said in a earlier post, to be considered at the top of the P4P list it seems a top overseas world champ has to ply his trade in the U.S. with career defining fights over a period of time. It's about money producing the fights that people want to see and making them possible. Like it or not this is the reality.

Given that PBF hasn't proved himself the best LWW or WW in the world makes these P4P lists pointless. He is being judged on his talent alone.

Whereas Pacman has beaten 2 future HoFs (Barrera and Morales) by TKO and still has PBF and Winky ahead of him in the Ring magazine's P4P list. IMO this is a bias shown in favour of home grown American fighters.

What do you think a P4P list is? It's the most talented fighters. P4P you are the best fighter in the world, it's a completely subjective idea. So naturally, there will be disagreements.

Corrales is HOF bound, Floyd beat him by TKO. Castillo is HOF bound, Floyd beat him twice. Winning by KO or by decision doesn't dictate the severity of the win. A wide decision win can be as equally or more complete of a win.

Shit, Pepp didn't KO anyone, and he's considered one of the best fighters overall, and one of the three best defensive fighters ever.

You say the lists are pointless, then complain that Pacquiao isn't first? How does that make sense? If they were pointless, this debate wouldn't be brough up 65 times a month. And I personally believe that if Taylor beats Winky outright, there's a third name in the bunch.

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 12 Sep 2006, 13:44

Take this site for example, 1 2 and 3 are American, and it's supposedly a computer ranked system. Of course it has it's flaws, but those three are always near the top.

Take the IBO rankings as well.

MW - Wright, Taylor 1 and 2, Joval holds their title, he's 6th.
WW - Mayweather 1, Hatton 2, they have a combined 3 fights there.
S Feath - Barrera 1, Pacquiao 2 which is also the case on boxrec, and they are also always near the top of p4p lists

These are 4 guys near the top of every p4p list, and they're near the top on two computerized systems. Granted, every system will have it's flaws, but two rankings have such similarities to that and the Ring Magazine, it can't be as biased as you think.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 12 Sep 2006, 14:21

Terence wrote:
viciousmaussa wrote:
Terence wrote: No. Lewis did make the P4P list. It is way of levelling the playing field and assessing guys based on skills, you are partly there but the fact is that Lewis did get ranked and in his day Ali would be in there. It is open to all as long as your skills/resume is top-notch.
whether he did or he didn't, it doesn't matter. the original reasoning behind the p4p debate was wholly for the reason i referred to. that is the way the phrase was coined in the 40s or 50s. in the purest sense, that it what it comes down to. it was really so that Jake Lamotta wouldn't keep crying over not being "able to beat Joe Louis" (lol, in the film at least)

nowadays "pound for pound" is a cliche that is hideously overused. How many tmes have we heard ppl say that so and so is "pound for pound the best middleweight in the world"?

Currently Lorenzo Parra is starting to look head & shoulders above everyone, but Venezuelan flyweights who whip their challengers on the road in places like PR & Japan don't necessarily get recognized.

being the undisputed heavyweight champ is a distincion all its own. The absence of Lewis - or someone of his calibre - shows a heavyweight king is as important as a p4p king.
So why were people described as pound for pound before the 1940's and before Louis' reign?

It came about because boxing fans, not content with what is on their plate, constantly want to compare fighters from different divisions, even though, physiologically, your weight dictates, often, how you fight.So they said: "Pound for pound this guy would beat that guy in skills." It really means skill for skill, I read it being applied before Ray complained he would never be better than Joe. It is a leveller, not a way of discouting heavies.

that way "skill for skill", not "pound for pound", would be more appropriate. Like it or not, the term has connotations of weight (sadly some ppl seem to think p4p as "punch for punch, ie pounding someone) - which persists to this day. It would be a nice little term if the little guys would get more of a mention, but sadly they don't.

For me, p4p rankings will always be suspect if outstanding boxers like Brian Mitchell and Veeraphol Sahaprom could go unrecognized; and that fellow greats like Mike McCallum and Azumah Nelson (with Mitchell and Dick Tiger the greatest Africans ever) could be absent from the lists for alarmingly long times.

SticknMove · Post by **SticknMove** » 12 Sep 2006, 17:08

Mattyp151 wrote:
SticknMove wrote:
Mattyp151 wrote: You guys are blowing the whole nationalism thing out of the water. Where do the biggest fights occur? Las Vegas and NY. Who more often then not, is taking part in these fights? Americans. It may just be a numbers thing or whatever, but Americans are notoriously part of almost every big fight within a year, thus they get the benefit of the doubt for that.

The best fight of the year had no Americans in it, and hardly any of the boxing world has mentioned it for more than a paragraph. Not England, not South Africa, not Germany, not anyone.
As I said in a earlier post, to be considered at the top of the P4P list it seems a top overseas world champ has to ply his trade in the U.S. with career defining fights over a period of time. It's about money producing the fights that people want to see and making them possible. Like it or not this is the reality.

Given that PBF hasn't proved himself the best LWW or WW in the world makes these P4P lists pointless. He is being judged on his talent alone.

Whereas Pacman has beaten 2 future HoFs (Barrera and Morales) by TKO and still has PBF and Winky ahead of him in the Ring magazine's P4P list. IMO this is a bias shown in favour of home grown American fighters.
What do you think a P4P list is? It's the most talented fighters. P4P you are the best fighter in the world, it's a completely subjective idea. So naturally, there will be disagreements.

Corrales is HOF bound, Floyd beat him by TKO. Castillo is HOF bound, Floyd beat him twice. Winning by KO or by decision doesn't dictate the severity of the win. A wide decision win can be as equally or more complete of a win.

Shit, Pepp didn't KO anyone, and he's considered one of the best fighters overall, and one of the three best defensive fighters ever.

You say the lists are pointless, then complain that Pacquiao isn't first? How does that make sense? If they were pointless, this debate wouldn't be brough up 65 times a month. And I personally believe that if Taylor beats Winky outright, there's a third name in the bunch.

The point I am making is that the list appears pointless when a guy ranked P4P no1 hasn't proved himself the best in his current weight category. PBF didn't achieve that at LWW and hasn't at WW so far. If he stepped up the divisions and beat the very best then it would be fair enough.

The case I make for Pacman is the fact that as a ex flyweight champ he moved up the weights, moved to the States and chased down the very best out there, which happened to be at SFW. The manner of the wins, against 2 exceptional fighters in Barrera and Morales, and the fact they had never been stopped before, suggests a very special fighter.

However the lists are compiled, it appears to some outside of the States, that more weight is given to Americans who beat other top Americans, with less regard shown to excellent imports who ply their trade there. Maybe I'm overstating the bias bit, but that's how it appears to me at times.