If Canelo wins he is p4p #1

[RonnyJ]

in terms of achievemants. skill wise he wont never be on a level of loma, as nobody is in the world right now.

boxing fans are known to make little sense, they say the p4p ranking is determined by achievemants and record. who has the better record, who fought the best opponents.

than they have crawford over canelo . crawford fought gamboa, horn, khan and postol. canelo fought mayweather, GGG, jacobs, mosley, cotto and lara. it doesnt take long figuring out who fought better opponents. canelo took risks, crawford not. canelo achieved way more.

boxing fans simply dont know which way to go, but resume or by talent/skills. if we go by talent/skills roy jones, leonard, loma are the best boxer ever and langford, greb and armstrong wouldnt even be in a top 20 of the best boxer ever. but boxing fans say resume is more important, so why is crawford than over canelo or usyk, usyk cleaned one of the strongest divisions in boxing out, breidis is p4p top 10 material, gassiev a monster.

long story short, if canelo wins against kovalev in terms of achievemants he is #1.

[Enlightened-One]

In the context of accomplishments, Canelo has by far achieved the most in boxing.

In terms of pugilistic talents, there are probably more gifted fighters, but their fighting ability may be flattered slightly due to facing less talented opposition that the sort of guys Canelo is accustomed to.

[dagilechia]

He lost twice to Golovkin though

[RonnyJ]

He lost twice to Golovkin though

floyd wouldve lost against GGG too


and that what happens when you take risks. oscar took a risk by fighting hopkins and lost, canelo took risks by fighting lara or GGG, both in prime. why didnt floyd took risks. when tszyu, prime margarito, prime pac or GGG were around? chickened out. better box guerrero, berto or a old gatti.

[dagilechia]

He lost twice to Golovkin though

floyd wouldve lost against GGG too


and that what happens when you take risks. oscar took a risk by fighting hopkins and lost, canelo took risks by fighting lara or GGG, both in prime. why didnt floyd took risks. when tszyu, prime margarito, prime pac or GGG were around? chickened out. better box guerrero, berto or a old gatti.

But Floyd wasn't a middleweight.

[RonnyJ]

floyd wouldve lost against GGG too


and that what happens when you take risks. oscar took a risk by fighting hopkins and lost, canelo took risks by fighting lara or GGG, both in prime. why didnt floyd took risks. when tszyu, prime margarito, prime pac or GGG were around? chickened out. better box guerrero, berto or a old gatti.

But Floyd wasn't a middleweight.

canelo aint a light heavyweight. floyd fans are like floyd himself, full of excuses

[margaret thatcher]

Floyd didn't need excuses, he beat everyone he faced, including schooling Nelo. An awesome boxer.

Canelo will be hands down P4P 1 if you judge by resume over the last few years, it would be a really good win. People knock Nelo but he's fought excellent opposition and scored legit wins over all but TBE

[RonnyJ]

Floyd didn't need excuses, he beat everyone he faced, including schooling Nelo. An awesome boxer.

Canelo will be hands down P4P 1 if you judge by resume over the last few years, it would be a really good win. People knock Nelo but he's fought excellent opposition and scored legit wins over all but TBE

maybe you new to boxing. floyd had 10000 excuses. canelo facing kovalev, is like floyd facing kelly pavlik, he wouldve never had the balls fighting a 6'2 champion with power/

[Enlightened-One]

Floyd didn't need excuses, he beat everyone he faced, including schooling Nelo. An awesome boxer.

Canelo will be hands down P4P 1 if you judge by resume over the last few years, it would be a really good win. People knock Nelo but he's fought excellent opposition and scored legit wins over all but TBE

Don't feed the RonnyJ troll.

[margaret thatcher]

[RonnyJ]

Floyd didn't need excuses, he beat everyone he faced, including schooling Nelo. An awesome boxer.

Canelo will be hands down P4P 1 if you judge by resume over the last few years, it would be a really good win. People knock Nelo but he's fought excellent opposition and scored legit wins over all but TBE

Don't feed the RonnyJ troll.

i make sense. you a profiler

[MATTPRENTICE]

If Alvarez beats Kovalev, a very, very, very strong argument for P4P #1 can be made.

[Onetimeonly]

But Floyd wasn't a middleweight.

canelo aint a light heavyweight. floyd fans are like floyd himself, full of excuses

Lol, says the pacamaniac.

[margaret thatcher]

If Alvarez beats Kovalev, a very, very, very strong argument for P4P #1 can be made.

Disagree, I think it's a very, very, very, very strong argument

[dagilechia]

But Floyd wasn't a middleweight.

canelo aint a light heavyweight. floyd fans are like floyd himself, full of excuses

I am not a Floyd fan. Canelo will lose to Kovalyov (or win by Robbery Decision).

[dagilechia]

If Alvarez beats Kovalev, a very, very, very strong argument for P4P #1 can be made.

Disagree, I think it's a very, very, very, very strong argument

imo it's just a very, very strong argument, but i get your point.

[boxing_rocks]

He lost twice to Golovkin though

floyd wouldve lost against GGG too


and that what happens when you take risks. oscar took a risk by fighting hopkins and lost, canelo took risks by fighting lara or GGG, both in prime. why didnt floyd took risks. when tszyu, prime margarito, prime pac or GGG were around? chickened out. better box guerrero, berto or a old gatti.

GGG definitely wasn't in his prime. Wear and tear and possible injury definitely showed starting from Jacobs fight.

Kovalev is also clearly way beyond his prime. P4P #1 based on smart cherry picking? Whatever. P4P lists are worthless anyway.

[RonnyJ]

they are not, they show the best boxers ever.

[DrDuke]

Canelo lost to Golovkin, that's true. While I won't be picking Golovkin confidently over prime Mayweather, even if it wasn't a catchweight bout, but Floyd moved to the MWs. He was just too elusive.

[Duran1970]

You lost me when you said Armstrong and Langford aren't top 20 talent/skills.

[tiny_acres]

You lost me when you said Armstrong and Langford aren't top 20 talent/skills.

Well he loses most readers when he posts

[RonnyJ]

when u take the nostalgia glasses off you can see, 20 boxers are faster and better skill wise than them.ini

go on youtube and watch armstrong fight. who does he do 80 % of the time during a fight? he fights with no guard of his head, his head is open for punches. his head is down, his guard is down and he comes in like that and starts brawling. tell me what happens when u leave your head open and come close to boxers such as prime cotto, prime tszyu, prime hearns? you get some hooks, you get some uppercuts and you leave the ring on a stretcher.

langford was good for his time, but far to unathletic and stiff for todays standard. usyk, tyson, ali, holmes, holyfield etc. much more versatile than him.

[Duran1970]

Cotto tzsyu Hearns would be leaving on a stretcher if they fought Armstrong...you have no clue

[RonnyJ]

Cotto tzsyu Hearns would be leaving on a stretcher if they fought Armstrong...you have no clue

with the head all open for punches, hell no.

[Enlightened-One]

langford was good for his time, but far to unathletic and stiff for todays standard. usyk, tyson, ali, holmes, holyfield etc. much more versatile than him.

How have managed to evaluate Sam Langford’s pugilistic talents when there is either a distinct lack of video material of his bouts, with those snippets that are available being so fuzzy that it’s difficult to watch the action clearly?

If you’re such an expert on Sam Langord, then it should be very easy for you to answer the following questions?

• How many Sam Langford fights are freely available to watch online?
• When did you first watch Sam Langford?
• What are some of your favourite Sam Langford fights?
• What is Sam Langford’s fighting style?
• Which opponents did Sam Langford face that impressed you the most?

I love asking questioning people who critique fighters that competed a century ago or more.