Your current p4p list?

[Mexi-Box]

1. Usyk
2. Canelo
3. Golovkin
4. Sor Rungvisai
5. Lomachenko
6. Crawford
7. Mikey
8. Inoue
9. Santa Cruz
10. Briedis

I think it's a transitional state for the p4p list at the moment. Kovalev losing and Estrada and Sor Rungvisai doing nothing really hampers the list. Porter could easily be on the list too. I thought Porter beat Thurman and with his impressive winning spree he could easily be 10 or 9 on the list. I think my top 8 are cemented. They can be put in whatever order, but I think these are the top names of the sport atm. Tragedy that people don't have Usyk #1 p4p. The man practically cleaned out the most talented division in boxing currently.

I had Golovkin beating Canelo, but I'll just go with official decision like I did for Kovalev/Ward.

[Mexi-Box]

By the way, it's indefensible having Crawford or Lomachenko top 3. Lomachenko just recently went even with a guy like Linares and Crawford has no single relevant win besides Postol.

Sor Rungvisai has 3 wins over the top 2 fighters of this era, Canelo has a win over his p4p contemporary (officially anyways), and Usyk just cleaned out the deepest division in boxing. Someone please defend having Crawford or Lomachenko in the top 3.

[ironbeard]

By the way, it's indefensible having Crawford or Lomachenko top 3. Lomachenko just recently went even with a guy like Linares and Crawford has no single relevant win besides Postol.

Sor Rungvisai has 3 wins over the top 2 fighters of this era, Canelo has a win over his p4p contemporary (officially anyways), and Usyk just cleaned out the deepest division in boxing. Someone please defend having Crawford or Lomachenko in the top 3.

Crawford is not just undefeated, but untouched in three divisions, so far. He is P4P #1 by the eye test. Usyk is #2. I probably do have Loma a bit too high but I consider Linares far higher quality than you do. It is all subjective anyway.

[Mexi-Box]

By the way, it's indefensible having Crawford or Lomachenko top 3. Lomachenko just recently went even with a guy like Linares and Crawford has no single relevant win besides Postol.

Sor Rungvisai has 3 wins over the top 2 fighters of this era, Canelo has a win over his p4p contemporary (officially anyways), and Usyk just cleaned out the deepest division in boxing. Someone please defend having Crawford or Lomachenko in the top 3.

Crawford is not just undefeated, but untouched in three divisions, so far. He is P4P #1 by the eye test. Usyk is #2. I probably do have Loma a bit too high but I consider Linares far higher quality than you do. It is all subjective anyway.

Not even the eye test. Not a single person on his resume is even on the level of a Gassiev, Briedis, or Glowacki. Who is Crawford's best win, Diaz, Postol, or Horn? I don't think any of these guys are even in the top 10 of their respective division at the moment. Maybe Postol, but I've not made a top 10 for LWW.

There is a huge chasm. This isn't subjective at all and p4p lists need to respect resume or it becomes crazy.

I don't consider Linares anyone in terms of p4p. He's lost to some average fighters, and he's struggled with some C-level ones like Crolla and Mitchell. The fact that he went on even terms with Lomachenko is pretty damming for him considering the resume of the top guys at the moment, especially Usyk.

[ironbeard]

By the way, it's indefensible having Crawford or Lomachenko top 3. Lomachenko just recently went even with a guy like Linares and Crawford has no single relevant win besides Postol.

Sor Rungvisai has 3 wins over the top 2 fighters of this era, Canelo has a win over his p4p contemporary (officially anyways), and Usyk just cleaned out the deepest division in boxing. Someone please defend having Crawford or Lomachenko in the top 3.

Crawford is not just undefeated, but untouched in three divisions, so far. He is P4P #1 by the eye test. Usyk is #2. I probably do have Loma a bit too high but I consider Linares far higher quality than you do. It is all subjective anyway.

Not even the eye test. Not a single person on his resume is even on the level of a Gassiev, Briedis, or Glowacki. Who is Crawford's best win, Diaz, Postol, or Horn? I don't think any of these guys are even in the top 10 of their respective division at the moment. Maybe Postol, but I've not made a top 10 for LWW.

There is a huge chasm. This isn't subjective at all and p4p lists need to respect resume or it becomes crazy.

I don't consider Linares anyone in terms of p4p. He's lost to some average fighters, and he's struggled with some C-level ones like Crolla and Mitchell. The fact that he went on even terms with Lomachenko is pretty damming for him considering the resume of the top guys at the moment, especially Usyk.

All in your OPINION.

Crawford clearly has the best combination of skills and gifts. Loma has jumped up fast. Linares is an excellent boxer who has continued to improve. Loma showed his mettle in that one.

I love how Usyk fights. He is highly skilled and gifted for a big man. I give him great credit for winning that tourney. I have him under Crawford.

You belittle Crawford’s competition but he has a decent string of Ws since 2013, taking a number of zeros away. He is just that much better than the competition, so far. Welter is to be his test. I see nothing but Spence at his level there, at the moment.

[prime]

1. Lomachenko
2. Usyk
3. Garcia
4. Crawford
5 GGG/Canelo

[Kilsby]

1) M. Garcia
2) Usyk
3) Crawford
4) Lomachenko
5) Canelo
6) GGG
7) Sor Rungvisai
8) Spence
9) Joshua
10) Santa Cruz / Thurman

The top 4 are so hard to split All outstanding....

[boxing_rocks]

Loma
Usyk
Crawford
Mikey
Golovkin
Inoue
Canelo
Spence

[dagilechia]

1.Terrence Crawford
2.Gennady Golovkin
3.Vasiliy Lomachenko
4.Oleksandr Usyk
5.Saul Alvarez
6.Mikey Garcia
7.Keith Thurman
8.Anthony Joshua
9.Wisaksil Wangek
10.Errol Spence Jr/Naoya Inoue

[Mexi-Box]

Crawford is not just undefeated, but untouched in three divisions, so far. He is P4P #1 by the eye test. Usyk is #2. I probably do have Loma a bit too high but I consider Linares far higher quality than you do. It is all subjective anyway.

Not even the eye test. Not a single person on his resume is even on the level of a Gassiev, Briedis, or Glowacki. Who is Crawford's best win, Diaz, Postol, or Horn? I don't think any of these guys are even in the top 10 of their respective division at the moment. Maybe Postol, but I've not made a top 10 for LWW.

There is a huge chasm. This isn't subjective at all and p4p lists need to respect resume or it becomes crazy.

I don't consider Linares anyone in terms of p4p. He's lost to some average fighters, and he's struggled with some C-level ones like Crolla and Mitchell. The fact that he went on even terms with Lomachenko is pretty damming for him considering the resume of the top guys at the moment, especially Usyk.

All in your OPINION.

Crawford clearly has the best combination of skills and gifts. Loma has jumped up fast. Linares is an excellent boxer who has continued to improve. Loma showed his mettle in that one.

I love how Usyk fights. He is highly skilled and gifted for a big man. I give him great credit for winning that tourney. I have him under Crawford.

You belittle Crawford’s competition but he has a decent string of Ws since 2013, taking a number of zeros away. He is just that much better than the competition, so far. Welter is to be his test. I see nothing but Spence at his level there, at the moment.

It's not my opinion that you can look like a monster fighting poor quality opposition. Usyk is looking like a monster fighting great quality opposition.

Crawford made his career at LWW and LW when they were in the dark ages in terms of talent. At WW, he beat a guy that several had losing to Pacquiao anyway.

[ironbeard]

Not even the eye test. Not a single person on his resume is even on the level of a Gassiev, Briedis, or Glowacki. Who is Crawford's best win, Diaz, Postol, or Horn? I don't think any of these guys are even in the top 10 of their respective division at the moment. Maybe Postol, but I've not made a top 10 for LWW.

There is a huge chasm. This isn't subjective at all and p4p lists need to respect resume or it becomes crazy.

I don't consider Linares anyone in terms of p4p. He's lost to some average fighters, and he's struggled with some C-level ones like Crolla and Mitchell. The fact that he went on even terms with Lomachenko is pretty damming for him considering the resume of the top guys at the moment, especially Usyk.

All in your OPINION.

Crawford clearly has the best combination of skills and gifts. Loma has jumped up fast. Linares is an excellent boxer who has continued to improve. Loma showed his mettle in that one.

I love how Usyk fights. He is highly skilled and gifted for a big man. I give him great credit for winning that tourney. I have him under Crawford.

You belittle Crawford’s competition but he has a decent string of Ws since 2013, taking a number of zeros away. He is just that much better than the competition, so far. Welter is to be his test. I see nothing but Spence at his level there, at the moment.

It's not my opinion that you can look like a monster fighting poor quality opposition. Usyk is looking like a monster fighting great quality opposition.

Crawford made his career at LWW and LW when they were in the dark ages in terms of talent. At WW, he beat a guy that several had losing to Pacquiao anyway.

Just because his comp was included in a weight class tournament does not mean they are all great.

Again, Crawford has lost maybe a handful of rounds in the last 5.5 years. He is #1

[tiny_acres]

All in your OPINION.

Crawford clearly has the best combination of skills and gifts. Loma has jumped up fast. Linares is an excellent boxer who has continued to improve. Loma showed his mettle in that one.

I love how Usyk fights. He is highly skilled and gifted for a big man. I give him great credit for winning that tourney. I have him under Crawford.

You belittle Crawford’s competition but he has a decent string of Ws since 2013, taking a number of zeros away. He is just that much better than the competition, so far. Welter is to be his test. I see nothing but Spence at his level there, at the moment.

It's not my opinion that you can look like a monster fighting poor quality opposition. Usyk is looking like a monster fighting great quality opposition.

Crawford made his career at LWW and LW when they were in the dark ages in terms of talent. At WW, he beat a guy that several had losing to Pacquiao anyway.

Just because his comp was included in a weight class tournament does not mean they are all great.

Again, Crawford has lost maybe a handful of rounds in the last 5.5 years. He is #1

Ironbeard is right. Crawford is my #1 pick also.
His dominance over his 2 previous weight classes pushed him over the rest

[Mexi-Box]

All in your OPINION.

Crawford clearly has the best combination of skills and gifts. Loma has jumped up fast. Linares is an excellent boxer who has continued to improve. Loma showed his mettle in that one.

I love how Usyk fights. He is highly skilled and gifted for a big man. I give him great credit for winning that tourney. I have him under Crawford.

You belittle Crawford’s competition but he has a decent string of Ws since 2013, taking a number of zeros away. He is just that much better than the competition, so far. Welter is to be his test. I see nothing but Spence at his level there, at the moment.

It's not my opinion that you can look like a monster fighting poor quality opposition. Usyk is looking like a monster fighting great quality opposition.

Crawford made his career at LWW and LW when they were in the dark ages in terms of talent. At WW, he beat a guy that several had losing to Pacquiao anyway.

Just because his comp was included in a weight class tournament does not mean they are all great.

Again, Crawford has lost maybe a handful of rounds in the last 5.5 years. He is #1

You're joking right? Glowacki was near #1 CW in the world after having dethroned Marco Huck and schooling the old guard in Cunningham, Briedis was #2 having ventured to HW and KOing one of the current paper champions and defeating some of the best of the division, and Gassiev was the #2 rated finalist of the tournament. These guys are all still within the top 10 as of this moment.

Crawford hasn't lost many rounds because his competition has been dire. This isn't an opinion, it's fact. You can't rate Postol, Indongo, or Beltran on the same level as the monsters I mentioned above. Speaking of the eye test, Briedis alone holds more talent that anyone Crawford has ever faced. Again, this isn't opinion.

Only one I can see ranking above Usyk is Canelo or Sor Rungvisai. As I said, no one has given me a good defense of their rankings other than the eye-test, which shouldn't be purely how p4p lists are built. Resume needs to come into play or you may as well have Joyce as #1 p4p since he's been on a KO-spree and looks formidable.

[ironbeard]

It's not my opinion that you can look like a monster fighting poor quality opposition. Usyk is looking like a monster fighting great quality opposition.

Crawford made his career at LWW and LW when they were in the dark ages in terms of talent. At WW, he beat a guy that several had losing to Pacquiao anyway.

Just because his comp was included in a weight class tournament does not mean they are all great.

Again, Crawford has lost maybe a handful of rounds in the last 5.5 years. He is #1

You're joking right? Glowacki was near #1 CW in the world after having dethroned Marco Huck and schooling the old guard in Cunningham, Briedis was #2 having ventured to HW and KOing one of the current paper champions and defeating some of the best of the division, and Gassiev was the #2 rated finalist of the tournament. These guys are all still within the top 10 as of this moment.

Crawford hasn't lost many rounds because his competition has been dire. This isn't an opinion, it's fact. You can't rate Postol, Indongo, or Beltran on the same level as the monsters I mentioned above. Speaking of the eye test, Briedis alone holds more talent that anyone Crawford has ever faced. Again, this isn't opinion.

Only one I can see ranking above Usyk is Canelo or Sor Rungvisai. As I said, no one has given me a good defense of their rankings other than the eye-test, which shouldn't be purely how p4p lists are built. Resume needs to come into play or you may as well have Joyce as #1 p4p since he's been on a KO-spree and looks formidable.

You can spend the rest of your life trying to convince yourself that Crawford does not deserve P4P #1, but it still won’t convince me. He is a three weight class belt holder who shuts good competition completely out. He did not just beat Burns in the UK, he shut him out so comprehensively that there was no room for a crap decision. Same with everyone he has faced including Horn, who I had losing to Pac but competitively, too close. Crawford left 0 doubt.

He always leaves zero doubt. Now he is up against a big, young, undefeated welter. Let’s see how he does.

[Mexi-Box]

Just because his comp was included in a weight class tournament does not mean they are all great.

Again, Crawford has lost maybe a handful of rounds in the last 5.5 years. He is #1

You're joking right? Glowacki was near #1 CW in the world after having dethroned Marco Huck and schooling the old guard in Cunningham, Briedis was #2 having ventured to HW and KOing one of the current paper champions and defeating some of the best of the division, and Gassiev was the #2 rated finalist of the tournament. These guys are all still within the top 10 as of this moment.

Crawford hasn't lost many rounds because his competition has been dire. This isn't an opinion, it's fact. You can't rate Postol, Indongo, or Beltran on the same level as the monsters I mentioned above. Speaking of the eye test, Briedis alone holds more talent that anyone Crawford has ever faced. Again, this isn't opinion.

Only one I can see ranking above Usyk is Canelo or Sor Rungvisai. As I said, no one has given me a good defense of their rankings other than the eye-test, which shouldn't be purely how p4p lists are built. Resume needs to come into play or you may as well have Joyce as #1 p4p since he's been on a KO-spree and looks formidable.

You can spend the rest of your life trying to convince yourself that Crawford does not deserve P4P #1, but it still won’t convince me. He is a three weight class belt holder who shuts good competition completely out. He did not just beat Burns in the UK, he shut him out so comprehensively that there was no room for a crap decision. Same with everyone he has faced including Horn, who I had losing to Pac but competitively, too close. Crawford left 0 doubt.

He always leaves zero doubt. Now he is up against a big, young, undefeated welter. Let’s see how he does.

Beltran beat Burns pillar-to-post and broke his jaw. That was an utter robbery, one of the worst ever. Indongo got demolished by Prograis.

Really, Pacquiao didn't leave much doubt against Horn. Horn was almost stopped in that fight, and no blame would've come to the referee if it was stopped. As I said, more people had Pacquiao winning than anything.

The only opponent Crawford has faced that is still relevant is Postol. That win did elevate because he gave Josh Taylor a good fight. Everyone else is currently far outside of the top 10, though.

I guess people just shut off their minds and aren't open to debate. One of the reasons I hate seeing other's p4p lists. They just throw up a bunch of their favorite fighters and don't defend.

[ironbeard]

You're joking right? Glowacki was near #1 CW in the world after having dethroned Marco Huck and schooling the old guard in Cunningham, Briedis was #2 having ventured to HW and KOing one of the current paper champions and defeating some of the best of the division, and Gassiev was the #2 rated finalist of the tournament. These guys are all still within the top 10 as of this moment.

Crawford hasn't lost many rounds because his competition has been dire. This isn't an opinion, it's fact. You can't rate Postol, Indongo, or Beltran on the same level as the monsters I mentioned above. Speaking of the eye test, Briedis alone holds more talent that anyone Crawford has ever faced. Again, this isn't opinion.

Only one I can see ranking above Usyk is Canelo or Sor Rungvisai. As I said, no one has given me a good defense of their rankings other than the eye-test, which shouldn't be purely how p4p lists are built. Resume needs to come into play or you may as well have Joyce as #1 p4p since he's been on a KO-spree and looks formidable.

You can spend the rest of your life trying to convince yourself that Crawford does not deserve P4P #1, but it still won’t convince me. He is a three weight class belt holder who shuts good competition completely out. He did not just beat Burns in the UK, he shut him out so comprehensively that there was no room for a crap decision. Same with everyone he has faced including Horn, who I had losing to Pac but competitively, too close. Crawford left 0 doubt.

He always leaves zero doubt. Now he is up against a big, young, undefeated welter. Let’s see how he does.

Beltran beat Burns pillar-to-post and broke his jaw. That was an utter robbery, one of the worst ever. Indongo got demolished by Prograis.

Really, Pacquiao didn't leave much doubt against Horn. Horn was almost stopped in that fight, and no blame would've come to the referee if it was stopped. As I said, more people had Pacquiao winning than anything.

The only opponent Crawford has faced that is still relevant is Postol. That win did elevate because he gave Josh Taylor a good fight. Everyone else is currently far outside of the top 10, though.

I guess people just shut off their minds and aren't open to debate. One of the reasons I hate seeing other's p4p lists. They just throw up a bunch of their favorite fighters and don't defend.

I weigh the eye test more than resume. You do the opposite. You denigrate Crawfords resume. I think that it is fine although not the toughest out there.

Nobody touches Crawford’s comprehensive dominance over the last 5.5 years. Nobody touches his repretoire of combos, his jab, his movement and his ring generalship.

The difference between us is that I recognize the subjectivity involved in the formation of our opinions.