AllTime Pound-4-Pound Attributes

[JCS]

I was thinking about making up an all-time P4P list, and to be honest, I wanted to try to rate these guys in certain areas using various weights depending on importance, and come up with an overall rating.. just to see how it would end up.

Now keep in mind these will be weighted based on importance, but here's what I came up with initially.

Initial order in weighting

Prime & Near-Prime Performance Quality
Opposition Quality Average & Cumulative
Prime & Near-Prime Length
Consistency
Weight Versatility Success
Title Achievements
Rematch Success
Road Warrior Value

Any thoughts?

[Diamond WEAPON]

Yeah. What about when a fighter isn't at his best? To me, the difference between the greats and the all-time greats is being able to kick it up a notch when they're past their respective primes. Ray Robinson wasn't in his prime when he fought Gene Fullmer for the World Middleweight Championship, but he found something deep inside of himself, and regained the title. Same with Ali later in life, Larry Holmes, Eder Jofre, Henry Armstrong, Sam Langford, Roberto Duran, Joe Louis, Ray Leonard, Archie Moore, Bob Fitzsimmons, Lennox Lewis, Evander Holyfield, Jersey Joe Walcott, Max Schmeling. That sort of dedication speaks volumes as to how great they were.

I think that can work for certain fighters yes, but some others might not have had the luxury of fighting opposition that wasn't just as great... I mean Kostya Tszyu was incredible for many years after his prime but when he finally met another great fighter in Ricky Hatton he floundered. Or how about Diego Corrales fighting a big tough Joshua Clottey after years of ravaging his body to make weight ntm losing 2 fights in a row and though he performed bravely, simply couldn't overcome Clottey's power, youth, and workrate.

[m1kee50]

ability to deal with a loss - Ali, Lewis, DLH etc.

[jimmy the gent]

why when it comes to discussing all-time great fighters do many people immediately throw in all the yester-year fighters from the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's. They seem to outnumber fighters of today and the near past by about 8/1 or even more. There are many fighters today who could have lived with the fighters of yesterday and therefore deserve to be on the lists of all-time great fighters. Fighters like: roy jones, floyd mayweather, oscar de la hoya, bernard hopkins, james toney, barrera, winky wright, kostya tzsyu, mike tyson, pernell whittaker, tito trinidad and many more.
I mean for e.g. there are many lists that would have Rocky marciano in the top ten. What is this based on. I think he was a great yes but ahead of mike tyson, roy jones or a mayweather. come on, what is this based on?

Just a thought
thank you

[JCS]

why when it comes to discussing all-time great fighters do many people immediately throw in all the yester-year fighters from the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's. They seem to outnumber fighters of today and the near past by about 8/1 or even more. There are many fighters today who could have lived with the fighters of yesterday and therefore deserve to be on the lists of all-time great fighters. Fighters like: roy jones, floyd mayweather, oscar de la hoya, bernard hopkins, james toney, barrera, winky wright, kostya tzsyu, mike tyson, pernell whittaker, tito trinidad and many more.
I mean for e.g. there are many lists that would have Rocky marciano in the top ten. What is this based on. I think he was a great yes but ahead of mike tyson, roy jones or a mayweather. come on, what is this based on?

Just a thought
thank you

I think you have to weight the comparisons of fighters within their own time rather than between eras. Due to improved training methods, diet, etc., boxers today are naturally going to physically outmatch those of yesteryear.

[elmersalsa]

I was thinking about making up an all-time P4P list, and to be honest, I wanted to try to rate these guys in certain areas using various weights depending on importance, and come up with an overall rating.. just to see how it would end up.

Now keep in mind these will be weighted based on importance, but here's what I came up with initially.

Initial order in weighting

Prime & Near-Prime Performance Quality
Opposition Quality Average & Cumulative
Prime & Near-Prime Length
Consistency
Weight Versatility Success
Title Achievements
Rematch Success
Road Warrior Value

Any thoughts?

Nice attributes. I also can include stuff like:
HISTORICAL IMPACT
DIVISION DOMINANCE
LONGEVITY
WORLD RECORDS
CONTRIBUTIONS AND INFLUENCE IN THE SPORT
UNBEATEN STREAKS
WORLD TITLE FIGHTS RECORD
OVERALL CAREER RECORD
DURABILITY

[JCS]

I was thinking about making up an all-time P4P list, and to be honest, I wanted to try to rate these guys in certain areas using various weights depending on importance, and come up with an overall rating.. just to see how it would end up.

Now keep in mind these will be weighted based on importance, but here's what I came up with initially.

Initial order in weighting

Prime & Near-Prime Performance Quality
Opposition Quality Average & Cumulative
Prime & Near-Prime Length
Consistency
Weight Versatility Success
Title Achievements
Rematch Success
Road Warrior Value

Any thoughts?

Nice attributes. I also can include stuff like:
HISTORICAL IMPACT
DIVISION DOMINANCE
LONGEVITY
WORLD RECORDS
CONTRIBUTIONS AND INFLUENCE IN THE SPORT
UNBEATEN STREAKS
WORLD TITLE FIGHTS RECORD
OVERALL CAREER RECORD
DURABILITY

I changed Title Achievements to Recognized Success.. so that kinda fulfills the titles, records and historical impact. Division dominance kinda falls in with weight versatility success but I think I need a new name for it. Longevity/Durability kinda fits in with Consistency/Prime Length.

Contributions and influences is a different one... but I'm not sure I'd include that in a P4P.