606v2 Top 15 Pound for Pound rankings (please submit VOTES)

First topic message reminder :

It's time to vote for the 606V2 POUND FOR POUND Top 15 rankings (Q1 2013).

Rules:
-Only 1 post per 606 member.
-Only active fighters allowed (must of fought in the last 18 months unless officially retired eg Shane Mosley)
-Outlandish listing’s will be DQ.
-A fighter needs two individual votes to have his points included.

Principles:
Your Top 15 should be based as at the current point in time.

Point Scoring System:
Quite simple, #1 scores 15 points, #2 scores 14 points etc… I will tally up the totals by the deadline date and will present the results.

NOTE: PLEASE TRY AND USE FULL NAMES (or correct surnames) & LIST your results.

For reference only, the previous Top 15 606v2 P4P rankings as at 12th December 2012 was:


1 Floyd Mayweather Jr. (1)
2 Andre Ward (4)
3 Nonito Donaire (5)
4 Juan Manuel Marquez (3)
5 Sergio Martinez (6)
6 Wladamir Klitschko (7)
7 Manny Pacquiao (2)
8 Timothy Bradley (11)
9 Adrien Broner (16)
10 Carl Froch (10)
11 Yuriorkis Gamboa (8)
12 Abner Mares (18)
13 Robert Guerrero (New)
14 Canelo Alvarez (17)
15 Vitali Klitschko (13)


Thanks as always, this usually brings up terrific results.

manos de piedra wrote:Yes but how do you decide who the better fighter is?

Its all very subjective. Personally I would seperate them into pre and post war. Almost two styles of boxing and different rules etc. A boxer of today can't be compared to boxers of the 20s.

So you're basing in one win for Marquez before which he look laboured against Fedchenko why ignore that?

There is no justifiable reason to have Marquez above Mayweather.

manos de piedra wrote:Yes but how do you decide who the better fighter is?

although the question isn't not directed at me, the way I decide ATG great list is on Resume + Ability, in P4P lists I decide by Recent Performance's + Ability

In terms of recent performance that can vary, in floyds case, his only recent performance can be said of his fight vs Cotto and Maybe Ortiz, 2 fights, but in the case of say Donaire, it will be atleast twice that amount, maybe even going back to montiel fight, because he has been so active

Imperial Ghosty wrote:So you're basing in one win for Marquez before which he look laboured against Fedchenko why ignore that?

There is no justifiable reason to have Marquez above Mayweather.

Like I said, I value that Pac win over floyds recent win i.e. Pac KO W > Floyd UD Cotto + Floyd KO Ortiz

Why are you ignoring his poor performance against the woeful Fedchenko?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Why are you ignoring his poor performance against the woeful Fedchenko?

am not, let me put it this way then

Pac W - Fed W > Cotto + Ortiz

his Pacquiao KO win is better than anything on Floyds current resume, if not his resume ever. When was the last time Floyd beat a top 5 P4P fighter, its been more than 18 months like the OP states

KO-KING wrote:I draw a distinction between all time pound for lists and current ones. For me, a current pound for pound list is about who the best fighters in the world are at the moment. An all time pound for pound list I view as basically ranking fighters on acheivement.

I take into account both things, the reason you have to take into account there recent wins is because fighters improve and deteriorate and sometimes quite quickly, not saying floyd but in general, but to to prove that they haven't declined, they have to fight a decent opponent, hence why i take into account recent fights and performance in those recent fights, to me its simple, JMM KO'd pacquiao a top P4P fighter, Fighter of the decade, he Knocked him unconscious, Mayweather went to a some what competitive decision against a past his best miguel cotto, who was towards the bottom end of Most top 15 P4P lists at the time.

You simply can not state someone is the best without competition, sure you can say you think they are better, like i think Floyd is better than JMM, but I wont rank floyd over JMM at this moment of time, eventhough i rank him higher in ATG list, but P4P lists are meant to active, meaning recent fights have to be taken into place.

I know you and most would agree with me when I say JMM W-KO over Pac>Floyd W-UD over Cotto, if not JMM W-KO over Pac>Floyd W-UD over Cotto + W over Ortiz
[/quote]

It just strikes me as missing the fundemental point of the list to rank JMM above Mayweather when you think Mayweather is both the better fighter and would beat him again.

I would accept that JMM latest KO of Pacquiao is a better win. But the real question for me is: is it enough to convince me he is better than Mayweather at the moment. In that regard the answer is no. Therefore I just cant put JMM above Mayweather if the object of my list is to reflect the top ten fighters at the moment.

I appreciate that cross comparing weights and so on can make the task difficult but I see JMM and Mayweather as a pretty straightforward case because they are in a similar weight class now and Mayweather beat him cmprehensively. Even accounting for JMM beating Pacquiao I just dont see him having a strong argument to rank above Mayweather as a better fighter.

In any case Marquez finds himself some distance behind Ward and Donaire let alone Mayweather, one good win isn't enough to be considered the p4p number one.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:In any case Marquez finds himself some distance behind Ward and Donaire let alone Mayweather, one good win isn't enough to be considered the p4p number one.

one good win?, good?, That is the best win by anyone in boxing recently

1. Floyd
2. Donaire
3. Ward
4. Martinez
5. Marquez
6. Pacquiao
7. W Klitschko
8. Mares
9. Froch
10. Gamboa
11. Alvarez
12. Hopkins
13. Guerrero
14. Kessler
15. Bradley

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Yes but how do you decide who the better fighter is?

Its all very subjective. Personally I would seperate them into pre and post war. Almost two styles of boxing and different rules etc. A boxer of today can't be compared to boxers of the 20s.

Well thats why I rank all time lists based mainly on acheivement. Id never be able to rank on perceived talent or ability because Ive only seen a fraction of the boxers in history in a real meaningful capacity.

Actual perceived talent or ability only features to a small degree in my lists because if it isnt translated properly into acheivement then whats the point of it anyway?

I would disagree has there have been clear signs of decline in Pacquiaos performances recently, having lost to Bradley prior to that it's hard to call it the best win recently.

Lost to Bradley? Yeah, the record says so, but the fight was never a loss to Pac.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I would disagree has there have been clear signs of decline in Pacquiaos performances recently, having lost to Bradley prior to that it's hard to call it the best win recently.

it's arguable if he lost to bradley, that is if you think losing more than 3 rounds is losing.

Pacquiao was on the decline, but was still P4P top 3, no one else has done that to a top 3 P4P fighter in the world

I didn't really consider it a robbery, a case can be made for Bradley winning, Pacquiao won a few rounds clearly but the rest was very very close.

If you are basing it on recent wins KO then your list overall makes very little sense, which recent win of Wlads would outdo Frochs over Bute, is Cotto a better win than Nishioka or Froch, Kessler, Dawson and Abraham?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I didn't really consider it a robbery, a case can be made for Bradley winning, Pacquiao won a few rounds clearly but the rest was very very close.

If you are basing it on recent wins KO then your list overall makes very little sense, which recent win of Wlads would outdo Frochs over Bute, is Cotto a better win than Nishioka or Froch, Kessler, Dawson and Abraham?

firstly if that isnt what you call a robbery I like to know what you call a robbery, 'case can be made for Bradley winning' no, no it cant.

If you actually read mate, I've already put its a combination of things, not just recent wins (whether it was a KO or not makes little difference)

Watch the fight again with the sound, using the 10 point must system it's an incredibly close fight.

Based on what is Mayweather behind Marquez but above Donaire and Ward?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Watch the fight again with the sound, using the 10 point must system it's an incredibly close fight.

Based on what is Mayweather behind Marquez but above Donaire and Ward?

I seen the fight twice, scored it 117-111 both times, it was not close at all, stop, just stop, i can see why you would disagree with me on things like the list but this is ridiculous - ' incredibly close fight' it was not.

for me Donaire and Ward can be put ahead of Floyd, I actually made a mistake putting him 2nd, but dont mind it being the way it is, like i said before Talent + Recent Performance = overall ranking, For me Floyd is #1 P4P in terms of talent, but is probably 4th for the second criteria.

Scoring is based on personal opinion, just because you don't think it was close doesn't mean everyone thinks the same way, the word robbery gets banded about far too much now. Defensively Bradley was very good in that, a lot of Pacquiaos flashy work was hitting his arms and gloves, he landed but not that much.

The Matthyse losses were not robberies
Abril against Rios and Lara against Williams were both robberies.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Scoring is based on personal opinion, just because you don't think it was close doesn't mean everyone thinks the same way, the word robbery gets banded about far too much now. Defensively Bradley was very good in that, a lot of Pacquiaos flashy work was hitting his arms and gloves, he landed but not that much.

The Matthyse losses were not robberies
Abril against Rios and Lara against Williams were both robberies.

Scoring is based on personal opinion, - I agree
just because you don't think it was close doesn't mean everyone thinks the same way- I agree
the word robbery gets banded about far too much now - I agree

Defensively Bradley was very good in that, a lot of Pacquiaos flashy work was hitting his arms and gloves, he landed but not that much - He did much better work than Bradley, Bradley landed nothing of significance, pacquiao was better defencively, Bradley landed only on Pac's gloves

The Matthyse losses were not robberies - Totally agree, had mathysse winning both by a point in a close fight
Abril against Rios and Lara against Williams were both robberies.- I Agree.

But Pacquiao won clearly and yes it was a robbery,

Danny Flexen, Boxing News: 115-113 Bradley
Cameron Sharpe, Boxing Fancast: 115-115 Draw
Chris Manix, Sports Illustrated: 115-113 Pacquiao
Lem Satterfield, Ring Magazine: 115-113 Pacquiao
Gordon Marino, The Wall Street Journal: 115-113 Pacquiao
Armando Alvarez, Telemundo: 115-113 Pacquiao
Jake Donovan, BoxingScene.com: 115-113 Pacquiao
Terry Dooley, BoxingScene.com: 115-113 Pacquiao
Jordan Capobianco, BoxingNews24.com: 116-112 Pacquiao
Franklin McNeil, Newark Star-Ledger: 116-112 Pacquiao
Brett Okamoto, ESPN: 116-112 Pacquiao
Steve Bunce, BoxNation.com/BBC: 116-112 Pacquiao
Juan Manuel Marquez: 116-112 Pacquiao
Max Kellerman, HBO: 116-112 Pacquiao
Andreas Hale, FightNews.com: 116-112 Pacquiao
Brian Arman Graham, Sports Illustrated: 116-112 Pacquiao
George Willis, The New York Post: 116-112 Pacquiao
Rick Reeno, BoxingScene.com: 116-112 Pacquiao
Robert Morales, Los Angeles Daily News: 116-112 Pacquiao
Ben Thompson, FightHype.com: 116-112 Pacquiao
Tim Smith, New York Daily News: 116-112 Pacquiao
Suge Green, On the Grind Boxing Radio: 116-112 Pacquiao
Steve Zemach, The Queensbury Rules.com: 116-112 Pacquiao
Michael Nelson, TheCruelestSport.com: 116-112 Pacquiao
Tom Gray, SecondsOut.com: 116-112 Pacquiao
Joel Sebastionelli, LIITR Box Radio: 116-112 Pacquiao
CheckHook.com: 116-112 Pacquiao
BoxingSocialist.com: 116-112 Pacquiao
Ricky Hatton: 116-112 Pacquiao
Amir Khan, Primetime: 116-112 Pacquiao
Wayne McCullough: 116-112 Pacquiao
Ken Hissner, DogHouseBoxing.com: 116-112 Pacquiao
Alexander Belenky, Sport-Express.ru: 116-112 Pacquiao
Rob Day, RingNews24.com: 117-112 Pacquiao
Ryan Burton, BoxingScene.com: 117-112 Pacquiao
Matt Youmans, Las Vegas Review-Journal: 117-111 Pacquiao
Graham Houston, FightWriter.com/FightNews.com/ESPN: 117-111 Pacquiao
Stephen Edwards, BoxingTalk.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Kieran Mulvaney, ESPN: 117-111 Pacquiao
Tim Dahlberg, Associated Press: 117-111 Pacquiao
Ron Borges, Boston Herald: 117-111 Pacquiao
Cliff Rold, BoxingScene.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Chris Robinson, BoxingScene.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Steve Carp, Las Vegas Review-Journal: 117-111 Pacquiao
Ronnie Shields, boxing trainer: 117-111 Pacquiao
David Mayo, The Grand Rapids Press: 117-111 Pacquiao
Robert Little, BlackSportsOnline.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Jorge Hernandez, The Low Blow.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
David Greisman, BoxingScene.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Benny Henderson, DogHouseBoxing.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Ryan Phillips, BleacherReport.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Graham Parker, The Guardian (UK): 117-111 Pacquiao
Ed Graney, Las Vegas Review-Journal: 117-111 Pacquiao
Luis Sandoval, BoxingScene.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Jonathan Sakti, Comcast Sports Net Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
Richie Tomasini, Comcast Sports Net Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
Tim Starks, The Queensbury Rules: 117-111 Pacquiao
Champ Ross, DaTruthBoxing.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Lance Pugmire, Los Angeles Times: 117-111 Pacquiao
Darren Velasco, 8CountNews.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Ryan Maquinana, Comcast Sports Net Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
George Diaz, The Orlando Sentinel: 117-111 Pacquiao
Steve Kim, MaxBoxing.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Doug Fischer, Ring Magazine: 117-111 Pacquiao
FightersRated.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Luke Thomas, MMAFighting.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Scott Christ, BadLeftHook.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Kevin Iole, Yahoo! Sports: 117-111 Pacquiao
Tommy Gunn, BoxingAsylum.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Charles Farrell, No Holds Barred Radio Show: 117-111 Pacquiao
Gareth Davies, London Telegraph: 117-111 Pacquiao
John Perretti, No Holds Barred Radio Show: 117-111 Pacquiao
John Raspanti, DogHouseBoxing.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Ron Lewis, Primetime/BBC: 117-111 Pacquiao
Brent Brookhouse, SBNation.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Jake Emen, ProBoxing-Fans.com: 117-111 Pacquiao
Alexey Sukachev, Sports.ru: 117-111 Pacquiao
Kevin Mitchell, The Guardian (UK): 118-112 Pacquiao
Steve Lillis, BoxNation: 118-111 Pacquiao
Nick Xouris, FightHype.com: 118-111 Pacquiao
Brett Newton, Pound4Pound.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Joseph Herron, FightSaga.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Mark Lyons, 8CountNews.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Danny "Swift" Garcia: 118-110 Pacquiao
Mike Koppinger, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Gabriel Montoya, MaxBoxing.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ryan Songalia, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Robert Ecksel, Boxing.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Pete O'Brien, USA Today: 118-110 Pacquiao
John McCormick, BoxingTalk.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Victor Contreras, The Sacramento Bee: 118-110 Pacquiao
Eric Raskin, HBO/TheSweetScience.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Chuck Giampa, Showtime: 118-110 Pacquiao
John Russell, boxing trainer (Buster Douglas trainer): 118-110 Pacquiao
Rich Marotta, KFI Los Angeles: 118-110 Pacquiao
Jeff Mayweather: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ace Freeman, FightFan.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Kelsey McCarson, TheSweetScience.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Mario Cabrera, The Boxing Republic: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ramon Aranda, 3MoreRounds.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Colin Seymour, Examiner.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Nigel Collins, Espn.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Paddy Cronan, On the Grind Boxing Radio: 118-110 Pacquiao
Denzil Stone, OnTheBreak.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Phil Jay, WorldBoxingNews.net: 118-110 Pacquiao
Geoffrey Ciani, EastSideBoxing.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Michael Rosenthal, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Eugeny Pilipenko, Vringe.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Vadim Zhuk, Championat.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ken Pollitt, the13thround.com: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ted Sares, Boxing.com: 119-111 Pacquiao
Allen Barra, The Atlantic: 119-110 Pacquiao
Barry Tompkins, Showtime: 119-110 Pacquiao
Vittorio Tafur, The San Francisco Chronicle: 119-109 Pacquiao
Ray Markarian, TheSweetScience.com: 119-109 Pacquiao
Harold Lederman, HBO: 119-109 Pacquiao
Dan Rafael, ESPN: 119-109 Pacquiao
Max Parker, BoxingWatchers.com: 119-109 Pacquiao
Scott Sawitz, Fox Sports/Inside Fights: 119-109 Pacquiao
Leroy Cleveland, FightSaga.com: 119-109 Pacquiao
Michael Woods, ESPN: 119-109 Pacquiao
Michael Marley, BoxingConfidential.com/Examiner.com: 119-109 Pacquiao
Skip Bayless, ESPN: 119-109 Pacquiao

121/1/1 -

you say Bradley could have won, Danny Flexen and Cameron Sharpe agree and so do Ford and CJ Ross, 121 other 'experts' & 99% of Boxing fans Disagree.

The thing is KO-KING, is your pound for pound number 1 not really meant to represent who you think the actual best fighter in the world right now is?

If so, then does having a fighter who you dont actually believe is the best in the world at number 1 not rendering the formula you use to select them somewhat obsolete?

I could understand if you felt JMM latest win over Pacquiao made you beleive he was actually the best in the world. But if not, then I dont think it really make sense to have him above Mayweather.

manos de piedra wrote:The thing is KO-KING, is your pound for pound number 1 not really meant to represent who you think the actual best fighter in the world right now is?

If so, then does having a fighter who you dont actually believe is the best in the world at number 1 not rendering the formula you use to select them somewhat obsolete?

I could understand if you felt JMM latest win over Pacquiao made you beleive he was actually the best in the world. But if not, then I dont think it really make sense to have him above Mayweather.

let me put it this way, just say

Floyd talent = 10, recent performance = 7 = 16, JMM talent = 8, recent performance = 10 = 18

I think Floyd is the best in the world, but thats my subjective opinion, if i were to make it more objective and fair to the fighters who fight tough competition I would have to put JMM ahead, after all to prove your the P4P best you have to fight the Best, JMM has Floyd hasn't

But Marquez hasn't fought the best because the number one welterweight in the world is Mayweather.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:But Marquez hasn't fought the best because the number one welterweight in the world is Mayweather.

near the best, He is the only one who has fought anyone who could have been argued that was number 1, Pacquiao was atleast top3, no one mayweather has beaten recently were.
Obviously you disagree since you had bradley winning, so you can ignore what i say, because we just wont agree on that.

Anyway this wont really even wont stay the same, because if Nonito wins vs Rigo, he is going to Number 1 on my list

Ortiz was number 3 in the world and Cotto was number one in the world, how anyone can be considered the p4p number one when they're not even the number one in the division they fight in is logic that I just can't understand.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Watch the fight again with the sound, using the 10 point must system it's an incredibly close fight.

Based on what is Mayweather behind Marquez but above Donaire and Ward?

It wasn't even close ghosty and you know it.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Ortiz was number 3 in the world and Cotto was number one in the world, how anyone can be considered the p4p number one when they're not even the number one in the division they fight in is logic that I just can't understand.

ortiz was way out of his depth and Cotto was way past his best,

'how anyone can be considered the p4p number one when they're not even the number one in the division they fight in is logic that I just can't understand.'

So what if a fighter moves up a weight class and fights one fight in that weight (but wins), but was number one before he moved up, now that he has moved up but he isnt number one in his new division, so he drops from the P4P list - you dont understand, ok i can see why, your the same person that thinks Bradley may have won vs Pacquiao.

You can make excuses for why Mayweather beat them but they were amongst the best in the world going completely against your logic of saying he hasn't done so.

Marquez hasn't been number in a division for a couple of years now, he bypassed 140lbs loses to Mayweather and beats Pacquiao yet finds himself top of the pile, baffling.

1 Floyd Mayweather Jr
2 Andre Ward
3 Sergio Martinez
4 Juan Manuel Marquez
5 Nonito Donaire
6 Wladimir Klitchsko
7 Timothy Bradley
8 Manny Pacquaio
9 Abner Mares
10 Robert Guerrero
11 Yuriorkis Gamboa
12 Carl Froch
13 Saul Alvarez
14 Adrian Broner
15 Danny Garcia

Imperial Ghosty wrote:You can make excuses for why Mayweather beat them but they were amongst the best in the world going completely against your logic of saying he hasn't done so.

Marquez hasn't been number in a division for a couple of years now, he bypassed 140lbs loses to Mayweather and beats Pacquiao yet finds himself top of the pile, baffling.

I was talking about P4P top 3, Marquez has beaten one, Floyd hasnt recently, amongst the best in the world?, yeah sure in there division, which doesnt take into account weak divisions.

Neither division is particularly weak just another excuse to downplay his wins, Floyd has beaten 2 p4p number 3's in the past 4 years.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Neither division is particularly weak just another excuse to downplay his wins, Floyd has beaten 2 p4p number 3's in the past 4 years.

Who was the 2 P4P fighters, 1 is a relatively out of shape JMM who jumped 2 weight classes. Is the other Mosley?

4 years is far too long of a time period, then you are going into ATG great rankings, not P4P rankings, officially its 12 months, but here its 18.

So stop looking at what they did since 2009, look at what they have done in the past 18 months if not 12

KO-KING wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:The thing is KO-KING, is your pound for pound number 1 not really meant to represent who you think the actual best fighter in the world right now is?

If so, then does having a fighter who you dont actually believe is the best in the world at number 1 not rendering the formula you use to select them somewhat obsolete?

I could understand if you felt JMM latest win over Pacquiao made you beleive he was actually the best in the world. But if not, then I dont think it really make sense to have him above Mayweather.

let me put it this way, just say

Floyd talent = 10, recent performance = 7 = 16, JMM talent = 8, recent performance = 10 = 18

I think Floyd is the best in the world, but thats my subjective opinion, if i were to make it more objective and fair to the fighters who fight tough competition I would have to put JMM ahead, after all to prove your the P4P best you have to fight the Best, JMM has Floyd hasn't

Ok but my point is that I dont think you can truly objectify it with a formula. I mean even the data you are inputting into it is entirely subjective. Surely the easiest way would be to just pick the fighter you think is the best rather than getting bogged down in a kind of formula. Which doesnt even result in you picking the fighter you genuinely believe is the best. I also think its contradictory to say JMM is ahead of Floyd because Floyd hasnt beat the best when Mayweather schooled Marquez.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Ortiz was number 3 in the world and Cotto was number one in the world, how anyone can be considered the p4p number one when they're not even the number one in the division they fight in is logic that I just can't understand.

Hiding behind official rankings and official results which are often bovine manure.

manos de piedra wrote:

KO-KING wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:The thing is KO-KING, is your pound for pound number 1 not really meant to represent who you think the actual best fighter in the world right now is?

If so, then does having a fighter who you dont actually believe is the best in the world at number 1 not rendering the formula you use to select them somewhat obsolete?

I could understand if you felt JMM latest win over Pacquiao made you beleive he was actually the best in the world. But if not, then I dont think it really make sense to have him above Mayweather.

let me put it this way, just say

Floyd talent = 10, recent performance = 7 = 16, JMM talent = 8, recent performance = 10 = 18

I think Floyd is the best in the world, but thats my subjective opinion, if i were to make it more objective and fair to the fighters who fight tough competition I would have to put JMM ahead, after all to prove your the P4P best you have to fight the Best, JMM has Floyd hasn't

Ok but my point is that I dont think you can truly objectify it with a formula. I mean even the data you are inputting into it is entirely subjective. Surely the easiest way would be to just pick the fighter you think is the best rather than getting bogged down in a kind of formula. Which doesnt even result in you picking the fighter you genuinely believe is the best. I also think its contradictory to say JMM is ahead of Floyd because Floyd hasnt beat the best when Mayweather schooled Marquez.

that wasn't in the past 18 months, P4P are normally judged in the past 12 months. If i were to pick fighters i simply though were the best I'll have Broner in my top 10, but it would be ridiculous for me to do so ahead of many more accomplished fighters with greater resumes in recent time, hence the importance i put on recent fights as well as talent, I understand what you are saying about the fact that it will be always subjective, but I feel this it's more fair as it involves the actual fights they have fought recently, so its fair on the fighters that fight each other rather than duck and state they are the best.

KO-KING wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:

KO-KING wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:The thing is KO-KING, is your pound for pound number 1 not really meant to represent who you think the actual best fighter in the world right now is?

If so, then does having a fighter who you dont actually believe is the best in the world at number 1 not rendering the formula you use to select them somewhat obsolete?

I could understand if you felt JMM latest win over Pacquiao made you beleive he was actually the best in the world. But if not, then I dont think it really make sense to have him above Mayweather.

let me put it this way, just say

Floyd talent = 10, recent performance = 7 = 16, JMM talent = 8, recent performance = 10 = 18

I think Floyd is the best in the world, but thats my subjective opinion, if i were to make it more objective and fair to the fighters who fight tough competition I would have to put JMM ahead, after all to prove your the P4P best you have to fight the Best, JMM has Floyd hasn't

Ok but my point is that I dont think you can truly objectify it with a formula. I mean even the data you are inputting into it is entirely subjective. Surely the easiest way would be to just pick the fighter you think is the best rather than getting bogged down in a kind of formula. Which doesnt even result in you picking the fighter you genuinely believe is the best. I also think its contradictory to say JMM is ahead of Floyd because Floyd hasnt beat the best when Mayweather schooled Marquez.

that wasn't in the past 18 months, P4P are normally judged in the past 12 months. If i were to pick fighters i simply though were the best I'll have Broner in my top 10, but it would be ridiculous for me to do so ahead of many more accomplished fighters with greater resumes in recent time, hence the importance i put on recent fights as well as talent, I understand what you are saying about the fact that it will be always subjective, but I feel this it's more fair as it involves the actual fights they have fought recently, so its fair on the fighters that fight each other rather than duck and state they are the best.

It wasnt within 18 months but it was so comprehensive as to make the notion of JMM winning a rematch seem extremely unlikely.

To me it just seems like there is more focus on trying to satisfy an equation rather than the actual question being posed. JMM beating Pacquaio is a better win than anything of Mayweather in the last few years but its not enough to convince me hes a better fighter than Mayweather or would beat him which at the end of the day is really the point of creating a ranking list. Its who is the best in the world right now, not who has the best recent win.

I understand yu are trying to use a system to rank fighters but if you think Mayweather is better than JMM I dont really see what the issue is with just having him as number 1 is.

[/quote]

It wasnt within 18 months but it was so comprehensive as to make the notion of JMM winning a rematch seem extremely unlikely.

To me it just seems like there is more focus on trying to satisfy an equation rather than the actual question being posed. JMM beating Pacquaio is a better win than anything of Mayweather in the last few years but its not enough to convince me hes a better fighter than Mayweather or would beat him which at the end of the day is really the point of creating a ranking list. Its who is the best in the world right now, not who has the best recent win.

I understand yu are trying to use a system to rank fighters but if you think Mayweather is better than JMM I dont really see what the issue is with just having him as number 1 is. [/quote]

He hasnt fought anyone of significance, so i would feel its unfair on a guy like JMM who fought Pacquiao, when floyd at times seemed like he didn't, i think just simply stating who the best fighter is just to simple, Recent fights have to be taken into accoung, Floyd is still bigger than JMM, so the idea of a rematch would still be a slight mismatch in terms of size.

KO-KING wrote:

It wasnt within 18 months but it was so comprehensive as to make the notion of JMM winning a rematch seem extremely unlikely.

To me it just seems like there is more focus on trying to satisfy an equation rather than the actual question being posed. JMM beating Pacquaio is a better win than anything of Mayweather in the last few years but its not enough to convince me hes a better fighter than Mayweather or would beat him which at the end of the day is really the point of creating a ranking list. Its who is the best in the world right now, not who has the best recent win.

I understand yu are trying to use a system to rank fighters but if you think Mayweather is better than JMM I dont really see what the issue is with just having him as number 1 is. [/quote]

He hasnt fought anyone of significance, so i would feel its unfair on a guy like JMM who fought Pacquiao, when floyd at times seemed like he didn't, i think just simply stating who the best fighter is just to simple, Recent fights have to be taken into accoung, Floyd is still bigger than JMM, so the idea of a rematch would still be a slight mismatch in terms of size.[/quote]

Well I wouldnt say Mayweather has not fought anyone of significance. Cotto was a strong opponent, if not as good as Pacquaio.

When it comes down to it, I just dont really see the point of ranking a guy number 1 when you dont think he is. I dont see saying saying Mayweather is number 1 is simplistic. If anything, Im rating him number 1 after all things are considered. Yes JMM recent win over Pacquiao was a quality win but its just not enough to convince me JMM is number 1 or even 2 or 3 for that matter.

I think cotto would beat Marquez

manos de piedra wrote:
Well I wouldnt say Mayweather has not fought anyone of significance. Cotto was a strong opponent, if not as good as Pacquaio.

When it comes down to it, I just dont really see the point of ranking a guy number 1 when you dont think he is. I dont see saying saying Mayweather is number 1 is simplistic. If anything, Im rating him number 1 after all things are considered. Yes JMM recent win over Pacquiao was a quality win but its just not enough to convince me JMM is number 1 or even 2 or 3 for that matter.

Mayweather would beat JMM, but he is still bigger and holds the stylistic advantage, Cotto was so past it, everyone who didnt buy into the HBO + Mayweather/Cotto - crap about miguel being rejuvenated could see it, he wasn't that could, not P4P top 10, I think JMM is number one in terms of recent win, let me put it this way, I think Lucas beats garcia, but I dont rate Mathysse over Garcia, because of the simple fact that Garcia has the better win in Khan.

Diamond in the rough wrote:I think cotto would beat Marquez

twice his size, he should do

Fair enough KO-KING. You have your own system. But as I said earlier, it seems to be ranking recent wins rather than who is actually the best. JMM might have the best recent win of any fighter out there at the moment so if I was ranking fighters according to their last victory he might well be number 1. But I see the pound for pound list as being supposed to rank the top fighters in the world overall at the moment. JMM just isnt the best boxer in the world for me so I cant have him number 1.

If Wlad beats Povetkin and/or Haye, does his ranking increase or is there still a reticence to rank heavies near the top of the p4p chain

I don't see how a single win over Pacquiao can rank Marquez higher than the brilliance of both Donaire and Ward

Marquez- Mayweather L, Diaz W, Pacquiao L*, Fedchenko W, Pacquiao W (* contentious)

Ward- Kessler, Green, Bika, Abraham, Froch and Dawson

Donaire- Concepcion, Marquez, Sydorenko, Montiel, Narvaez, Vasquez, Mathebula, Nishioka and Arce

Recent form includes more than just 12 months.

manos de piedra wrote:Fair enough KO-KING. You have your own system. But as I said earlier, it seems to be ranking recent wins rather than who is actually the best. JMM might have the best recent win of any fighter out there at the moment so if I was ranking fighters according to their last victory he might well be number 1. But I see the pound for pound list as being supposed to rank the top fighters in the world overall at the moment. JMM just isnt the best boxer in the world for me so I cant have him number 1.

Its not just ranking recent wins, its combining both ability and recent win

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I don't see how a single win over Pacquiao can rank Marquez higher than the brilliance of both Donaire and Ward

Marquez- Mayweather L, Diaz W, Pacquiao L*, Fedchenko W, Pacquiao W (* contentious)

Ward- Kessler, Green, Bika, Abraham, Froch and Dawson

Donaire- Concepcion, Marquez, Sydorenko, Montiel, Narvaez, Vasquez, Mathebula, Nishioka and Arce

Recent form includes more than just 12 months.

I've already said its very close for me between the 4, if donaire beats Rigo, he's going number 1 for me.

Pound for Pound Rigo is lower than Darchinyan, Montiel and Nishioka were at the time time Donaire beat them, so why would that win be better than Pacquiao?

because rigo is just better

In all fairness KO KING, it seems to be pretty much putting the vast majority of emphasis on the most recent win. Even you dont believe JMM is a better fighter than Mayweather yet you have him number 1.

In cases where there is not much seperating two fighters I can see where the most recent win might account for alot but really the gap between Mayweather and JMM was so big that I cant see how JMM leap frogs him on the back of his last win.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Pound for Pound Rigo is lower than Darchinyan, Montiel and Nishioka were at the time time Donaire beat them, so why would that win be better than Pacquiao?

like i said its close, its not just that win, with rigo he would add to his recent run, in my opinion that would outweigh JMM win over Pacquiao

manos de piedra wrote:In all fairness KO KING, it seems to be pretty much putting the vast majority of emphasis on the most recent win. Even you dont believe JMM is a better fighter than Mayweather yet you have him number 1.

In cases where there is not much seperating two fighters I can see where the most recent win might account for alot but really the gap between Mayweather and JMM was so big that I cant see how JMM leap frogs him on the back of his last win.

Gap between floyd and JMM isnt that big, there fight didnt really prove anything, JMM was jumping 2 weight classes and wasnt in good shape, also floyd bigger in size than JMM. it was over 2 years ago, Floyd has declined since.

I feel that floyds last couple of fights have been disappointing, he should have done better vs that version of Cotto and Ortiz fight was cut short by a (legal) sucker punch - ortiz probably deserved it