BoxRec

I'd say he has to be in the top 5. He's a complete fighter with the best footwork in boxing, very fast hand speed, and decent power.

I got him #6 for now.

1. Roman Gonzalez
2. Sergey Kovalev
3. Gennady Golovkin
4. Andre Ward
5. Guillermo Rigondeaux
6. Terence Crawford

No. 4.

Horse wrote:No. 4.

Yes, 4 or 5 seems right.

gilgamesh wrote:I got him #6 for now.

1. Roman Gonzalez
2. Sergey Kovalev
3. Gennady Golovkin
4. Andre Ward
5. Guillermo Rigondeaux
6. Terence Crawford

Should Ward be higher than Crawford?

Ward hasn't done anything in years. Crawford became linear champion in 2 divisions during that time.

Freedom2013 wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:I got him #6 for now.

1. Roman Gonzalez
2. Sergey Kovalev
3. Gennady Golovkin
4. Andre Ward
5. Guillermo Rigondeaux
6. Terence Crawford

Should Ward be higher than Crawford?

Ward hasn't done anything in years. Crawford became linear champion in 2 divisions during that time.

Crawford's definitely had a stronger last few years no question, but Ward's had the better overall career by quite a bit still, and I had him #2 beyond only Floyd Mayweather before he took his extended layoff. He hasn't looked like he's lost anything since returning so I still rate him highly until I have a reason not to. The fight between Ward and Kovalev in November is crucial for both of those guys, and the winner will have a strong case of being P4P #1.

Crawford will rise to the top of the P4P list at some point within the next few years when he starts beating the Top Welterweights.

The P4P list is all subjective really. I don't take it as seriously as a lot of fans do, but it's fun to keep a Top 10 just for discussions sake.

Ward's career is in far past unless he beats Kovalev. At this time, Crawford is definitely above Ward.

boxing_rocks wrote:Ward's career is in far past unless he beats Kovalev. At this time, Crawford is definitely above Ward.

Not yet for me.

I'd go
1 Ward
2 Gonzalez
3 Rigondeaux
4 Golovkin
5 Crawford
6 Kovalev

Crawford will be at the top within 18 months

Ward's done nothing for years.

He should be nowhere near the top of a modern P4P list.

I'd have him as the best active fighter in the sport.

southace wrote:I'd have him as the best active fighter in the sport.

I probably would to if he hadn't been so inactive in recent years. If he beats Kovalev in November no question he's back on top of the P4P ladder. Same goes for Kovalev if he wins.

Gonzalez could possibly make a strong case for staying #1 as well as he's challenging for a World Title in his 4th weight class in September.

About #5.

Crawford is #4 in my book. More active than Ward or Rigondeaux.

#1 - Gonzalez
#2 - Golovkin
#3 - Kovalev
-------- The ordering of my top 3 always changes time to time.
#4 - Crawford
#5 - Ward*
= Rigondeaux*

*- Both have the same problem; being inactive. They both can still reach top 3, Ward would probably be in my top 3 if he beats Kovalev.

I’d rate Crawford as a top 10 pound-for-pounder, currently above past-their-prime stars like Cotto & Bradley, so he’d be eighth on my list.

That being said, I think we all need to resist the inevitable “pendulum swinging” effect found in most fans and media where they go from one vine (fighter) to the next based on the sport’s most recent noteworthy performance.

So let’s not get too carried away yet, because the quality of his resume is less than stellar… and the “eyeball test” alone is not a good enough barometer to grant Crawford an honorary rite of passage to be included amongst the top-five pound-for-pound elite, without requiring the need for validation by gaining a signature win.

I'm surprised Lomachenko hasn't been mentioned at all, Hopkins ranks him #2 P4P, still too early in his pro career yet I suppose

How anyone can have Rigo above Crawford bemuses me!

Stuarty30 wrote:How anyone can have Rigo above Crawford bemuses me!

ESPN and Ring Magazine do.

Despite being incredibly boring to watch, which is mostly the fault of his opponents failing to “make” fights competitive, I think he deserves some credit for being:
• The best super-bantamweight on the plant since 2012
• Gained his first world title after only being a pro for 18 months
• Holds a victory over a top-five pound-for-pounder, Nonito Donaire, as rated by ESPN & Ring
• He has been statistically rated as one of the best active boxers of recent years (as per his CompuBox Plus-Minus stats)
• His pedigree is proven partly by his amazing amateur record (i.e. winning the Olympics and the world championships twice, and finished with a 374-12 record)

Apart from passing the proverbial “eyeball test”, what has Terence Crawford accomplished so far to surpass any of those feats?

I don’t mind people rating Crawford over Rigondeux, as it’s their prerogative to do so, but there’s no mystery as to the reasons why the Cuban is considered a pound-for-pound rated fighter.

Enlightened-One wrote:

Stuarty30 wrote:How anyone can have Rigo above Crawford bemuses me!

ESPN and Ring Magazine do.

Despite being incredibly boring to watch, which is mostly the fault of his opponents failing to “make” fights competitive, I think he deserves some credit for being:
• The best super-bantamweight on the plant since 2012
• Gained his first world title after only being a pro for 18 months
• Holds a victory over a top-five pound-for-pounder, Nonito Donaire, as rated by ESPN & Ring
• He has been statistically rated as one of the best active boxers of recent years (as per his CompuBox Plus-Minus stats)
• His pedigree is proven partly by his amazing amateur record (i.e. winning the Olympics and the world championships twice, and finished with a 374-12 record)

Apart from passing the proverbial “eyeball test”, what has Terence Crawford accomplished so far to surpass any of those feats?

I don’t mind people rating Crawford over Rigondeux, as it’s their prerogative to do so, but there’s no mystery as to the reasons why the Cuban is considered a pound-for-pound rated fighter.

P4P for me isn't necessarily about achievements it's about who you think is the better fighter if weight wasn't an issue and I think Crawford has a lot more to his game than Rigo despite being 7/8 years younger. It hasn't got anything to do with Rigos opponents making him look boring it's just his style and the way he fights. The Donaire win was over three years ago now and he's not fought anyone of note since. When you compare the two records in terms of quality opponents there's not a lot between them. Crawford has also unified his division.

Rigo deserves credit because he's a special fighter but I don't think he should be above Crawford. I genuinely think Crawford is the future of the sport. Rigo will fight a few more no marks then retire. He's wasting his career. I genuinely hope I'm wrong because I'd love to see him in some big fights but he brings nothing to the table in terms of revenue or excitement.

I wouldn't mind seeing him bash Kid Galahad up next if Galahad has the balls to take the fight. As far as I'm aware he's fighting over here in Sep so fingers crossed.

DannyMCR wrote:I'm surprised Lomachenko hasn't been mentioned at all, Hopkins ranks him #2 P4P, still too early in his pro career yet I suppose

Hopkins is talking rubbish.

1. Gonzalez
2. Kovalev
3. Golovkin
4. Crawford
5. Lomachenko

But I hope that Lomachenko will lead my raiting very soon. Top Rank must do more fights per year for Vasyl. He is phenomal fighter who can do everything in the ring on the highest level of boxing art. I think he is the most spectacular boxer in the world. But I want to see more fights with best opponents.