BoxRec

Chepppaaa wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:1. Rigondeaux
2. Pacquiao
3. Lara
4. Mayweather
5. Golovkin
6. Kovalev
7. Gonzales
8. Walters
9. Inoue
10. Stevenson

i just see what i see. how can somebody be called "right now" p4p #1 when he struggled 2 times against somebody like maidana.

prime floyd was #1 p4p, floyd was for many years #1 on my list, but he is not the boxer he used to be and a 70 % floyd is not better than a prime 100 % rigondeauxwho is equaly if not more athletic, who beats his opponents more impressiv, and is overall equaly if notmore skilled than floyd.

lara for example beat canelo more impressiv than floyd did, i mean alvarez couldnt land nothing on lara, than lara decided to stop punching at all, and yes he lost some rounds, because he basicly stopped boxing for a few rounds. but that doesnt keep away the fact that lara is athleticly on another level and super skilled.

[/quote]

1.Your current number 1 was put down twice by Amagasa!

2. Lara beat Canelo more impressively? Have you swallowed bleach?

cocka09 wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:1. Rigondeaux
2. Pacquiao
3. Lara
4. Mayweather
5. Golovkin
6. Kovalev
7. Gonzales
8. Walters
9. Inoue
10. Stevenson

i just see what i see. how can somebody be called "right now" p4p #1 when he struggled 2 times against somebody like maidana.

prime floyd was #1 p4p, floyd was for many years #1 on my list, but he is not the boxer he used to be and a 70 % floyd is not better than a prime 100 % rigondeauxwho is equaly if not more athletic, who beats his opponents more impressiv, and is overall equaly if notmore skilled than floyd.

lara for example beat canelo more impressiv than floyd did, i mean alvarez couldnt land nothing on lara, than lara decided to stop punching at all, and yes he lost some rounds, because he basicly stopped boxing for a few rounds. but that doesnt keep away the fact that lara is athleticly on another level and super skilled.

1.Your current number 1 was put down twice by Amagasa!

2. Lara beat Canelo more impressively? Have you swallowed bleach?[/quote]


rigo won

floyd had what a lot of people say a draw against maidana 1 and a close match vs maidana 2 in which the reffery was totaly on floyds side, never letting one bit maidana to fight insight

canelo couldnt do nothing against lara

Chepppaaa wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote: 1.Your current number 1 was put down twice by Amagasa!

2. Lara beat Canelo more impressively? Have you swallowed bleach?

rigo won

floyd had what a lot of people say a draw against maidana 1 and a close match vs maidana 2 in which the reffery was totaly on floyds side, never letting one bit maidana to fight insight

canelo couldnt do nothing against lara

Floyd also won - what is your point here? Just stop with the hate!

Canelo landed 23% of his shots against Lara. Canelo landed 22% against Floyd - Lara only landed 107 punches on Canelo, Floyd landed 232. Can you not see how stupid your argument looks?

cocka09 wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote: 1.Your current number 1 was put down twice by Amagasa!

2. Lara beat Canelo more impressively? Have you swallowed bleach?

rigo won

floyd had what a lot of people say a draw against maidana 1 and a close match vs maidana 2 in which the reffery was totaly on floyds side, never letting one bit maidana to fight insight

canelo couldnt do nothing against lara

Floyd also won - what is your point here? Just stop with the hate!

Canelo landed 23% of his shots against Lara. Canelo landed 22% against Floyd - Lara only landed 107 punches on Canelo, Floyd landed 232. Can you not see how stupid your argument looks?

floyd won by officuiel judging, officiel also had timmy winning against pacquiao , thats why i dont go by officiel judging but by what i see and me as an expert i say, it was a draw.

Chepppaaa wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote: floyd won by officuiel judging, officiel also had timmy winning against pacquiao , thats why i dont go by officiel judging but by what i see and me as an expert i say, it was a draw.

You're about as much of an expert as CJ Ross.

cocka09 wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote: floyd won by officuiel judging, officiel also had timmy winning against pacquiao , thats why i dont go by officiel judging but by what i see and me as an expert i say, it was a draw.

You're about as much of an expert as CJ Ross.

mmhh

This is one I made back in March; can't see a reason to change it now:

1. Floyd Mayweather
2. Guillermo Rigondeaux
3. Manny Pacquiao
4. Roman Gonzalez
5. Sergey Kovalev
6. Carl Froch
7. Gennady Golovkin
8. Terence Crawford
9. Juan Manuel Marquez
10. Juan Francisco Estrada

Froch and Marquez are hanging by a thread. I'd be willing to reconsider Estrada (not for Wlad or Bradley though). Ward and MIkey Garcia would likely walk back into the rankings if they ever fight again. The rest of it I'm fairly happy with.

1.Mayweather
2.Pacquiao
3.Klitschko
4.Kovalev
5.Golovkin
6.Rigondeaux
7.Crawford
8.M.Garcia
9.Gonzalez
10.Bradley

HyacinthusTurnipseed wrote:This is one I made back in March; can't see a reason to change it now:

1. Floyd Mayweather
2. Guillermo Rigondeaux
3. Manny Pacquiao
4. Roman Gonzalez
5. Sergey Kovalev
6. Carl Froch
7. Gennady Golovkin
8. Terence Crawford
9. Juan Manuel Marquez
10. Juan Francisco Estrada

Froch and Marquez are hanging by a thread. I'd be willing to reconsider Estrada (not for Wlad or Bradley though). Ward and MIkey Garcia would likely walk back into the rankings if they ever fight again. The rest of it I'm fairly happy with.

finaly a good list, with rigo high.....people out here are so stupid they put old guys like marquez or fether fisted guys who get a draw against a nobody like timm had ahead of an olympic gold, pro world champion and technicly most sound boxer on the planet

Chepppaaa wrote:finaly a good list, with rigo high.....people out here are so stupid they put old guys like marquez or fether fisted guys who get a draw against a nobody like timm had ahead of an olympic gold, pro world champion and technicly most sound boxer on the planet

Did you actually score Bradley vs Chaves a draw?

Horse wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:finaly a good list, with rigo high.....people out here are so stupid they put old guys like marquez or fether fisted guys who get a draw against a nobody like timm had ahead of an olympic gold, pro world champion and technicly most sound boxer on the planet

Did you actually score Bradley vs Chaves a draw?

i am gonne be 100 % honest, i didnt even watch that shi/()t fight, because i dont watch feather fisted boxers period.

but i heard it was close and timmy is crap. he is an okay b level boxer, but he should not be nowhere near a top level boxer at welterweight.

Chepppaaa wrote:i am gonne be 100 % honest, i didnt even watch that shi/()t fight, because i dont watch feather fisted boxers period.

but i heard it was close and timmy is crap. he is an okay b level boxer, but he should not be nowhere near a top level boxer at welterweight.

Stop talking about that fight if you didn't see it. Bradley won clearly.

If you don't watch feather fisted fighters then how can you judge their ability accurately?

Horse wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:i am gonne be 100 % honest, i didnt even watch that shi/()t fight, because i dont watch feather fisted boxers period.

but i heard it was close and timmy is crap. he is an okay b level boxer, but he should not be nowhere near a top level boxer at welterweight.

Stop talking about that fight if you didn't see it. Bradley won clearly.

If you don't watch feather fisted fighters then how can you judge their ability accurately?

because i watched them in the past and sometimes i watch a fight highlight

put it this way, no boxer can be great unless he has power, there is 0 boxer outthere who is top 3 in his weight class and does not possess power. powerless boxers are all b too z

Chepppaaa wrote:

Horse wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:finaly a good list, with rigo high.....people out here are so stupid they put old guys like marquez or fether fisted guys who get a draw against a nobody like timm had ahead of an olympic gold, pro world champion and technicly most sound boxer on the planet

Did you actually score Bradley vs Chaves a draw?

i am gonne be 100 % honest, i didnt even watch that shi/()t fight, because i dont watch feather fisted boxers period.

but i heard it was close and timmy is crap. he is an okay b level boxer, but he should not be nowhere near a top level boxer at welterweight.

So Timmy is crap? That doesn't say much for Pac's last 3 opponents does it. You base wins over those guys and a KO loss as #1 pfp?

So Timmy is crap? That doesn't say much for Pac's last 3 opponents does it. You base wins over those guys and a KO loss as #1 pfp? [/quote]

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

rigo is my #1 p4p, not pac, learm how to read correctly

timmy is crap, so where the rest of pacs last opponents, but ability is more important than record. if you always go by record, judging who's boxer is better than the other, than you dumbhead had donaire winning against rigo or hopkins winning over kovalev. but thats not how boxing work, boxing is a sport of present and when a boxer is better than somebody in present time, than what happened on a record in the past does not matter much.

Chepppaaa wrote:So Timmy is crap? That doesn't say much for Pac's last 3 opponents does it. You base wins over those guys and a KO loss as #1 pfp?

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

rigo is my #1 p4p, not pac, learm how to read correctly

timmy is crap, so where the rest of pacs last opponents, but ability is more important than record. if you always go by record, judging who's boxer is better than the other, than you dumbhead had donaire winning against rigo or hopkins winning over kovalev. but thats not how boxing work, boxing is a sport of present and when a boxer is better than somebody in present time, than what happened on a record in the past does not matter much.[/quote]

My bad, you had Pac #2, ok. Like it or not, the competition you recently face is a huge factor. If it was not, Ward would be up there, and GGG probably a lot higher on lists. Wlad would be higher if he had better competition, Rigo, Thurman might be higher if he gets some big wins. If Kovalev beat Stevenson or Ward he would be higher, etc. As the saying goes, what have you accomplished lately? Fighters get taken off the list due to inactivity, and drop because of poor opposition. You don't maintain or raise your pfp status fighting guys like Rios and Algieri....or according to you - B crap level Tim Bradley. According to some Floyd should be moved down because of Maidana, but I think he would beat anyone of Pac's three opponents. Two of them badly, and one in a close but clear decision. My opinion.

Personally I don't put much stock in pfp lists because it is just an opinion, and definitely much more subjective than objective. Kind of like comparing fighters from different eras.

My list?

1. Mayweather
2. Ward
3. GGG
4. Rigo
5. Gonzalez
6. Pacquiao
7. Thurman
8. Kovalev
9. Wlad
10. Crawford

Now, put the names in a can, shake them up, spill them out, and make your argument. Opinions are never wrong. Some are accomplished, some have yet to prove they are.

Horse wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:I disagree completely. So you think that JMM, TB and Froch are part of the 10 most unbeatable boxers in the world right now? JMM is 41 years old dude and Froch is 37 and may never fight again. Bradley couldn't even beat Chaves who is mediocre. I think you need to brush up on what P4P actually means.

Bradley beat Chaves easily.

Where's your list?

My P4P list

1. Floyd Mayweather Jr
2. GGG
3. Kovalev
4. Terrance Crawford
5. Keith Thurman
6. Wlad
7. Danny Garcia
8. Andre Ward
9. Nicholas Walters
10. Leo Santa Cruz

These are the most dominant fighters today

Badhusker wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:So Timmy is crap? That doesn't say much for Pac's last 3 opponents does it. You base wins over those guys and a KO loss as #1 pfp?

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

rigo is my #1 p4p, not pac, learm how to read correctly

timmy is crap, so where the rest of pacs last opponents, but ability is more important than record. if you always go by record, judging who's boxer is better than the other, than you dumbhead had donaire winning against rigo or hopkins winning over kovalev. but thats not how boxing work, boxing is a sport of present and when a boxer is better than somebody in present time, than what happened on a record in the past does not matter much.

My bad, you had Pac #2, ok. Like it or not, the competition you recently face is a huge factor. If it was not, Ward would be up there, and GGG probably a lot higher on lists. Wlad would be higher if he had better competition, Rigo, Thurman might be higher if he gets some big wins. If Kovalev beat Stevenson or Ward he would be higher, etc. As the saying goes, what have you accomplished lately? Fighters get taken off the list due to inactivity, and drop because of poor opposition. You don't maintain or raise your pfp status fighting guys like Rios and Algieri....or according to you - B crap level Tim Bradley. According to some Floyd should be moved down because of Maidana, but I think he would beat anyone of Pac's three opponents. Two of them badly, and one in a close but clear decision. My opinion.

Personally I don't put much stock in pfp lists because it is just an opinion, and definitely much more subjective than objective. Kind of like comparing fighters from different eras.

My list?

1. Mayweather
2. Ward
3. GGG
4. Rigo
5. Gonzalez
6. Pacquiao
7. Thurman
8. Kovalev
9. Wlad
10. Crawford

Now, put the names in a can, shake them up, spill them out, and make your argument. Opinions are never wrong. Some are accomplished, some have yet to prove they are.[/quote]

___________________________________________________________________

sure are oppinions wrong, very often they are totaly wrong.

it is very simple to rate boxers for me. if they fought each other and one beat the other, than it is easy to rate the winner above the loser.
but if they did not fight each other or cant because they are in different divisions, than i fantasys who would win and i go of who has the better skill set, who is faster, who is more powerful, who has the advantage athleticy etc.. and than decide. so, p4p lists are never 100 % accurate, but they are very good and very badp4p lists. the baddest p4p lists are when they put robberys as an actual win. imagine canelo geting a scorecard in favour of him, i mean for me floyd won like 11 out of 12 rounds, but the official result was MD, so the fight was official close to being a win of canelo, when in reality canelo did nothing to earn the win and so many stupid people or media website than would have put canelo inside the top 3 because a robbery win of floyd and you want to tell me oppinions are never wrong hahahahaha.....

Chepppaaa wrote:

Badhusker wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:So Timmy is crap? That doesn't say much for Pac's last 3 opponents does it. You base wins over those guys and a KO loss as #1 pfp?

sure are oppinions wrong, very often they are totaly wrong.

it is very simple to rate boxers for me. if they fought each other and one beat the other, than it is easy to rate the winner above the loser.but if they did not fight each other or cant because they are in different divisions, than i fantasys who would win and i go of who has the better skill set, who is faster, who is more powerful, who has the advantage athleticy etc.. and than decide. so, p4p lists are never 100 % accurate, but they are very good and very badp4p lists. the baddest p4p lists are when they put robberys as an actual win. imagine canelo geting a scorecard in favour of him, i mean for me floyd won like 11 out of 12 rounds, but the official result was MD, so the fight was official close to being a win of canelo, when in reality canelo did nothing to earn the win and so many stupid people or media website than would have put canelo inside the top 3 because a robbery win of floyd and you want to tell me oppinions are never wrong hahahahaha.....

So when Floyd beats Manny you will admit that Floyd is better?

caldo2025 wrote:My P4P list

1. Floyd Mayweather Jr
2. GGG
3. Kovalev
4. Terrance Crawford
5. Keith Thurman
6. Wlad
7. Danny Garcia
8. Andre Ward
9. Nicholas Walters
10. Leo Santa Cruz

These are the most dominant fighters today

Danny Garcia isn't dominant. He's arguably lost to both Herrera and Peterson recently.

Santa Cruz's opposition has been too weak to call him a dominant fighter. Rigondeaux and Frampton are generally ranked ahead of him at super bantamweight.

So when Floyd beats Manny you will admit that Floyd is better?[/quote]
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

i already think that floyd will win against pac, but pac is naturaly smaller than floyd, floyd is like a natural lightweight, pac is like a natural flyweight

but you have to take into account, that we talk p4p, this means same size, same weight, similar reach. pac same size, reach with his condition and power and aggressiv style beats floyd

Chepppaaa wrote:So when Floyd beats Manny you will admit that Floyd is better?

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

i already think that floyd will win against pac, but pac is naturaly smaller than floyd, floyd is like a natural lightweight, pac is like a natural flyweight

but you have to take into account, that we talk p4p, this means same size, same weight, similar reach. pac same size, reach with his condition and power and aggressiv style beats floyd[/quote]

No freaking way id Pac a natural flyweight.Are you serious??????

tiny_acres wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:So when Floyd beats Manny you will admit that Floyd is better?

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

i already think that floyd will win against pac, but pac is naturaly smaller than floyd, floyd is like a natural lightweight, pac is like a natural flyweight

but you have to take into account, that we talk p4p, this means same size, same weight, similar reach. pac same size, reach with his condition and power and aggressiv style beats floyd

No freaking way id Pac a natural flyweight.Are you serious?????? [/quote]



manny started at minimumweight

maybe flyweight is a bit overboard, but lets just say that in terms of size and build manny is easily nautraly 2 divisions under floyd

Chepppaaa wrote:

tiny_acres wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote:So when Floyd beats Manny you will admit that Floyd is better?

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

i already think that floyd will win against pac, but pac is naturaly smaller than floyd, floyd is like a natural lightweight, pac is like a natural flyweight

but you have to take into account, that we talk p4p, this means same size, same weight, similar reach. pac same size, reach with his condition and power and aggressiv style beats floyd

No freaking way id Pac a natural flyweight.Are you serious??????

manny started at minimumweight

maybe flyweight is a bit overboard, but lets just say that in terms of size and build manny is easily nautraly 2 divisions under floyd[/quote]

Floyd was an amateur fighting at the same weight as Manny at the same age.
I will agree that Floyd is naturally a weight division higher.

Just out of curiosity can I ask what peoples definition of "Pound for Pound" is?