Ring P4p rankings ......

1. Mayweather
2. Klitscho
3, Paccy
4. Gonzales
5. Rigondeaux
6. Bradley..........(Are you kiddin me)
7. Marquez...
8. Froch...
9. Golovkin....(just entered)
10 Alvarez...

Rigondeaux and Pac above Wlad and Gonzales.............JMM shouldn't be on the list neither should Bradley........

Alvarez above GGG, Bradley and JMM......But below Froch..

Apart from that happy enough..

Dont think bradley should be anywhere near that list, i'm glad that Wlad is getting ranked highly

The thing with these rankings is they don't really take into account performances or opponents, it's more W's and L's. Bradley has looked poor and has a loss and draw in his last two fights but could have a L, L ( or D ), W, L, D. Klit is winning every time but his opponents are rubbish. Wlad 2nd best P4P? Not for me. Marquez must be in there purely for nostalgia now.

No Ward though, which is correct given inactivity.

DuransHorse wrote:No Ward though, which is correct given inactivity.

That's not even a decision, it's just their policy.

Scottrf wrote:

DuransHorse wrote:No Ward though, which is correct given inactivity.

That's not even a decision, it's just their policy.

Sorry, forgot he hasn't fought since 2013.

DuransHorse wrote:The thing with these rankings is they don't really take into account performances or opponents, it's more W's and L's.  Bradley has looked poor and has a loss and draw in his last two fights but could have a L, L ( or D ), W, L, D.  Klit is winning every time but his opponents are rubbish.  Wlad 2nd best P4P?  Not for me. Marquez must be in there purely for nostalgia now.

Very good summation..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Rigondeaux and Pac above Wlad and Gonzales.............JMM shouldn't be on the list neither should Bradley........

So all he does is reverse the Pac-I decision disgrace and suddenly he goes from #3 in your p4p list to not even deserving a mention??



Ring list is BS, hasn't had credibility for years. Just one guy's opinion, one heavily/easily influenced guy....

Scottrf wrote:

DuransHorse wrote:No Ward though, which is correct given inactivity.

That's not even a decision, it's just their policy.

It's every sensible intelligent persons policy. It's why Floyd couldn't be considered p4p#1 for the 2 years he was 'retired'.

Don't fight, can't get listed.

I wasn't saying otherwise, just pointing out that they weren't making a specific judgement on Ward.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Rigondeaux and Pac above Wlad and Gonzales.............JMM shouldn't be on the list neither should Bradley........

So all he does is reverse the Pac-I decision disgrace and suddenly he goes from #3 in your p4p list to not even deserving a mention??



Ring list is BS, hasn't had credibility for years.  Just one guy's opinion, one heavily/easily influenced guy....

If Bradley had Manny or May's cv....I'd have argued more for his inclusion..

How is his CV different from when you had him p4p #3?

1 loss? (effectively a ratification of what should have been the correct result first time round)

He wasn't good enough for 1 and 2...

Curry went from 1 to 8 after losing to Honey..

Think Danny Garcia gets a rough ride...Both Khan and Lucas were top wins...Better than anything GGG has accomplished..

Think DG is just a bit hard to like, not just because his dad is a bell, as people find it hard to be convinced by some of his wins.

He relies on his chin and timing/power and offers little else. Khan was a great win, but I (and others) think a non-blind Lucas M would have dealt with him fine (think I gave DG only 2 of the first 7 rounds) and that Herrera then beat him in the next fight.

Basically it's hard to be 'sold' on Danny Garcia.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Think DG is just a bit hard to like, not just because his dad is a bell, as people find it hard to be convinced by some of his wins.

He relies on his chin and timing/power and offers little else. Khan was a great win, but I (and others) think a non-blind Lucas M would have dealt with him fine (think I gave DG only 2 of the first 7 rounds) and that Herrera then beat him in the next fight.

Basically it's hard to be 'sold' on Danny Garcia.

I agree with the theory but for the ring P4P rankings, surely the fact he has beaten the above opponents is all that matters? He beat Khan and Matthysse fair and square, regardless of what might happen in a Matthysse fight where his eye doesn't golf ball.

http://bloguin.com/queensberryrules/2014-articles/pound-for-pound-top-20-boxers-update-1214.html

Here's a more considered version if you like this sort of rubbish. Any number of better/more accomplished fighters than Alvarez.

1. Floyd Mayweather, welterweight

The pound-for-pound king is fronting like he’ll fight our new #2; don’t count on it. However, after Amir Khan’s strong performance last weekend, the Brit is looking like the next best option, probably in May.

2. Manny Pacquiao, welterweight

The Pacman benefits from Ward’s inactivity and a win over undeserving Chris Algieri in November. Pacquiao isn’t what he once was, but he beat Timothy Bradley in 2014, too, so he’s in the Fighter of the Year discussion.

3. Juan Manuel Marquez, welterweight

Three p4p fighters in a row that are welterweights, and four in the top 10. Marquez doesn’t have anything cooking and recently suffered a knee injury, which means it could be a while before the cooking starts.

4. Roman Gonzalez, flyweight

A November stoppage of Rocky Fuentes pushes him one spot higher. I get the sentiment for him at #3, but Marquez still has a win over Pacquiao atop his very, very, very long (read: longer) resume of greatness.

5. Carl Froch, super middleweight

This isn’t about being stubborn for the sake of it. Forget about how Froch sometimes looks wobbly in the ring and just compare his resume, and competition, to the man beneath. Up next: Julio Cesar Chavez, Jr. in ’15?

6. Wladimir Klitschko, heavyweight

The November Kubrat Pulev win was one of his best performances and wins. Still, how good was Pulev, really? He’s here for dominance, as his best wins aren’t as impressive as others’. Next, maybe: spring, Bryant Jennings.

7. Timothy Bradley, welterweight

Bradley keeps slipping as others climb above him. Forget about the Diego Chaves cowpat draw. He’s still a top fighter, still a handful. He just needs elite competition not named “Pacquiao” again.

8. Guillermo Rigondeaux, junior featherweight

Rigo is heading to Asia for a fight against Hisashi Amagasa, who’s tougher than Stevenson’s competition, anyway. It’s been a wasted year for one of the sport’s purest boxers.

9. Juan Francisco Estrada, flyweight

This month, Estrada beat Joebert Alvarez in something of a stay-busy fight. Gods be good, we’ll land the much-anticipated, oft-talked about rematch between Gonzalez and Estrada in 2015.

10. Sergey Kovalev, light heavyweight

A few names could’ve contended for this spot. Kovalev has the best overall win among them, a November domination of Bernard Hopkins that made him a Fighter of the Year option. He booked Jean Pascal for March.

11. Danny Garcia, junior welterweight

Garcia wasted his year, too, but has a lot of good possible dates for 2015: Pacquiao, Lamont Peterson, Terence Crawford, Adrien Broner, Viktor Postol and Ruslan Provodnikov are all potential opponents.

12. Terence Crawford, lightweight

Speaking of — Crawford’s taking of the lightweight championship of the world helps put him here, and he, too, is a Fighter of the Year contender. He’s looking to move up in weight next.

13. Gennady Golovkin, middleweight

We’ll get an early 2015 highlight when Golovkin gets back in the ring in February, and against arguably his best opponent to date, Martin Murray.

14. Miguel Cotto, middleweight

Cotto talked about fighting in the fall or winter, but skipped it. If he doesn’t fight Canelo Alvarez or Golovkin next, he is going to make people frown.

15. Adonis Stevenson, light heavyweight

The division champ keeps getting sonned by Kovalev, losing out on fights against Hopkins and Pascal both. Instead he’s fighting… Dmitry Sukhotsky. Fail.

16. Mikey Garcia, junior lightweight

Fails abound. Garcia is one month away from getting kicked out of this list for inactivity, and all his talk of moving up to 135 or 140 is just talk until he stops fighting with his promoter Top Rank.

17. Shinsuke Yamanaka, bantamweight

With a win over Suriyan Sor Rungvisai in October, Yamanaka moves up one spot. He remains one of the sport’s most underrated fighters. You just wish he’d get in there with Anselmo Moreno.

18. Johnny Gonzalez, featherweight

He’s mostly a one-win fighter as pound-for-pound goes, and did almost nothing in 2014, some of which was Abner Mares’ (that one win) fault. He’s very vulnerable to getting passed by almost anyone.

19. Canelo Alvarez, junior middleweight

An injury (or “injury”) put off a late-2014 fight nobody really wanted, vs. Joshua Clottey. A fight with Cotto in 2015 is one of the biggest and best in all of boxing.

20. Nicholas Walters, featherweight

Walters stopped a pound-for-pound fighter who’d never been stopped, Nonito Donaire. Vasyl Lomachenko is the pick among featherweights on all-around skills, but Walters has the much, much better victory.

Honorable mentions, in no particular order: Vasyl Lomachenko, Bernard Hopkins, Nonito Donaire, Marco Huck, Carl Frampton, Erislandy Lara, Takashi Uchiyama, Lucas Matthysse, Andre Ward

Bit out of date that list.

I don't think anyone other than Rigo and GGG has fought since? Not a fan of these things but Ring positioning Canelo in their top ten tells you everything you need to know about their intentions.

1) Mayweather
2) Rigondeaux
3) Pacquiao
4) Wladimir
5) Gonzalez
6) Froch
7) Bradley
8) Marquez
9) Golovkin
10) Kovalev
11) Stevenson
12) Crawford
13) Danny Garcia
14) Estrada
15) Khan

Outside of the top five I found it pretty tough. Minimal gaps between a lot of different guys, and amongst them no real forerunners if you combine their recent form with the skills they've shown etc.

Interesting that Marquez is such an unpopular choice. Great career overall but if you look at his last five fights he still has a knockout win over Pacquiao as well as a superb showing the year before against Manny which, I still firmly believe, should have been rewarded with a points win too. The decision he lost to Bradley was fair, but still close and I can't fathom a top ten without Bradley, personally. A pretty classy performance against Alvarado followed, and while Alvarado is no great shakes (and if his latest outring is owt to go by, he's badly on the slide at that) I'm not sure he's any worse than a few of the guys that Kovalev, Stevenson and Wladimir have been feasting on.

I think there can be too much of a tendency to focus on losses. If it's a shocker and comes against a guy you had no business losing or struggling against, then fair enough. But in the case of Marquez, a close losing effort to someone like Bradley isn't any worse than a winning effort against a safe-bet operator like Caparello, Sukhotsky or Leapai, going back to the Kovalev / Stevenson / Wladimir comparison I just drew. In terms of losing to outstanding or even great fighters in high-quality contests, I don't deduct too many points, particularly if it's a competitive bout. Often even in that kind of case you see whoever loses the fight suddenly vanishing from the rankings or plummeting down them if they're lucky. If Mayweather were to lose to Manny in May he'd still be no lower than 2, or 3 at the absolute lowest for me.

I guess it's hard to imagine a forty-one year old still realistically being one of the ten best fighters in the world, all things considered, but even at his age I still see Marquez as one of the more technically great, skilfull fighters out there. Still think he could potentially beat a few of the younger guns at 140 / 147 such as Provodnikov, Matthysse, Guerrero, Porter etc who have styles relatively well suited to his own. Appreciate that other fighters from the next generation like Brook and Thurman might be fancied over him, but neither of them has beaten anyone as good as a 41-year-old Marquez yet.

I agree that Marquez probably shouldn't be there by rights....But at the same time, I don't think enough people have proven that they should be there to take his spot away from him, either. Strange scenario.

I'm by no means saying Alvarez is a potential great or anything but he has to be above a fair few on that list Chris; Khan, Estrada, Garcia, Crawford, Stevenson and Kovalev. Trout, Angulo and most importantly Lara put him above all them for me.

I think it's an oversight by Chris...

Makes no sense to have some of those names above Canelo..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I think it's an oversight by Chris...

Makes no sense to have some of those names above Canelo..

I'll keep my trap shut on Khan being at 15 with no Brook there as well Trussy.

Think Chris has been on the half lager shandies again the larrylightweight WBC Super Emeritus holder!

Right, time to feck off and drink as many beers as humanly possible. Have a good weekend one and all.

Got to admit I forgot about Alvarez, Hammersmith. Would put him higher than Khan and Estrada, so that's thirteenth spot. Not sure I could honestly make a case for him being above all those other names you've mentioned though, and I wouldn't put him top ten.

I never really understood the buzz around the Canelo-Mayweather fight. Sticks in the craw a bit for me that it is able to hide behind all these revenue records, because as I said the other day I just don't feel it was ever a particularly significant fight. But either way, I was really, really disappointed in Alvarez's performance and I guess I'm finding that hard to shake. I appreciate he was faced with the best fighter in the world, but guys such as Cotto, Guerrero and Maidana weren't talked up anywhere near as much as Alvarez was ahead of fighting Floyd, yet he gave Mayweather less problems than any of them.

Good victories to his name and I'm a fan of his approach to taking on the challenges, but I feel he's been a bit fortunate to escape with a 2-0 record against Trout and Lara. But as you say, he got the victories which should count for a lot, I agree. I suppose I just want him to have a really clear, dominant win against a really top fighter or divisional rival before I put him in the higher bracket, and I still don't think he's had one yet.

Coxy, Brook has one win in a close, scrappy fight against Porter in terms of wins that would even come in to the equation for this type of list. I'm not putting him ahead of Khan on that win alone, regardless of whether or not Porter beat Alexander.

Will be a moot point when Khan outclasses Brook, anyway. :wink:

Kovo = Cleverly and a 50 yr old..........

Alvarez = Erislandy, Trout, Mosley and Rhodes........

No brainer..

88Chris05 wrote:Got to admit I forgot about Alvarez, Hammersmith. Would put him higher than Khan and Estrada, so that's thirteenth spot. Not sure I could honestly make a case for him being above all those other names you've mentioned though, and I wouldn't put him top ten.

I never really understood the buzz around the Canelo-Mayweather fight. Sticks in the craw a bit for me that it is able to hide behind all these revenue records, because as I said the other day I just don't feel it was ever a particularly significant fight. But either way, I was really, really disappointed in Alvarez's performance and I guess I'm finding that hard to shake. I appreciate he was faced with the best fighter in the world, but guys such as Cotto, Guerrero and Maidana weren't talked up anywhere near as much as Alvarez was ahead of fighting Floyd, yet he gave Mayweather less problems than any of them.

Good victories to his name and I'm a fan of his approach to taking on the challenges, but I feel he's been a bit fortunate to escape with a 2-0 record against Trout and Lara. But as you say, he got the victories which should count for a lot, I agree. I suppose I just want him to have a really clear, dominant win against a really top fighter or divisional rival before I put him in the higher bracket, and I still don't think he's had one yet.

Coxy, Brook has one win in a close, scrappy fight against Porter in terms of wins that would even come in to the equation for this type of list. I'm not putting him ahead of Khan on that win alone, regardless of whether or not Porter beat Alexander.

Will be a moot point when Khan outclasses Brook, anyway.

We could go down the road that Khan got slapped by Garcia, struggled horribly against the hardly world beating Diaz and then beat two guys you couldn't put on a par with Porter.

That 100% reliable ranking source Ring Mag has Brook @ #3 and Khan @ #4 as well in the WW rankings...

Anyway, gotta run now to the city area. Hate that place, full of suited Meat trombone soloist who can only talk about how great they are. So basically like having a bar full of Strongy's!

Catch up Monday. Big double bet on Thurman & Broner this weekend, odds are 1/3 but will be a nice return if it comes in or the next two months wedding saving money down the drain!

How much credit should Alvarez really get for a washed up Mosley and a faded Rhodes, who was never quite world class in any case Truss? He didn’t even look that great against Sugar Shane in my opinion, either. As I said, not including Alvarez at all was an oversight on my part but I certainly don’t think he’s a nailed-on top tenner. Aside from Danny Garcia’s horror struggle with Herrera, I can’t think of any performance that any of my top fifteen guys (remember, Khan drops out after my error) have produced over their last few fights as damaging in my eyes as the one Alvarez produced against Floyd.

Will concede that the Trout and Lara wins are very, very good results, mind you. Just feel that the original concept of pound for pound shouldn’t be totally lost behind that (ie, looking at the actual qualities of the fighter and his performances) and I think there are better fighters out there than Alvarez, that’s all. But he is a good fighter in his own right. If he can score a really dominant or clear win over a big name then his claims would become a lot stronger, for me.

Put him higher than me by all means if that's how you see it, but as I pointed out earlier I think it's a tricky task past the first obvious few names and I don't think Alvarez is an outstnaidng candidate amongst that next group, really.

They would be valid points Chris if some of those above him had done more but they haven't, can we honestly say Crawford, Stevenson or Kovalev have done more, I don't think they have, definitely not Crawford.

Coxy001 wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:Got to admit I forgot about Alvarez, Hammersmith. Would put him higher than Khan and Estrada, so that's thirteenth spot. Not sure I could honestly make a case for him being above all those other names you've mentioned though, and I wouldn't put him top ten.

I never really understood the buzz around the Canelo-Mayweather fight. Sticks in the craw a bit for me that it is able to hide behind all these revenue records, because as I said the other day I just don't feel it was ever a particularly significant fight. But either way, I was really, really disappointed in Alvarez's performance and I guess I'm finding that hard to shake. I appreciate he was faced with the best fighter in the world, but guys such as Cotto, Guerrero and Maidana weren't talked up anywhere near as much as Alvarez was ahead of fighting Floyd, yet he gave Mayweather less problems than any of them.

Good victories to his name and I'm a fan of his approach to taking on the challenges, but I feel he's been a bit fortunate to escape with a 2-0 record against Trout and Lara. But as you say, he got the victories which should count for a lot, I agree. I suppose I just want him to have a really clear, dominant win against a really top fighter or divisional rival before I put him in the higher bracket, and I still don't think he's had one yet.

Coxy, Brook has one win in a close, scrappy fight against Porter in terms of wins that would even come in to the equation for this type of list. I'm not putting him ahead of Khan on that win alone, regardless of whether or not Porter beat Alexander.

Will be a moot point when Khan outclasses Brook, anyway.

We could go down the road that Khan got slapped by Garcia, struggled horribly against the hardly world beating Diaz and then beat two guys you couldn't put on a par with Porter.

Could also go down the route that Porter took 24 rounds to scrape a MD over Diaz #justsaying

Well I did say that Alvarez would be at least thirteenth, Hammersmith, and I originally listed Crawford as twelfth, so obviously I'd be willing to interchange them depending on my mood or whatever. To clarify, I was arguing that I don't see any reason for Canelo to be above all of those names you listed, but he may be above some, below others.

Those guys have been outclassing decent fighters and I haven't seen them made to look as poor as Alvarez was against Mayweather yet, either. Hey, maybe I'm being harsh but that showing from Alvarez really left me with doubts about his pedigree (in terms of his ambitions of becoming a really elite fighter, I mean - obviously he's world class by any definition, as are quite a few others who haven't made anyone's list).

It was against Mayweather, yes. A Mayweather aged 36 and giving away siginifcant weight on the night, and who didn't have to really extend himself. If the Trout and Lara wins are better than, say, Stevenson's over Dawson or Kovalev's over Hopkins, then by how much can they be, given that Alvarez scraped home with two decisions that many feel were dubious whereas Stevenson and kovalev have been dominant in beating divisional rivals?

Maybe I just use the eye test a bit more than others who prefer cold, hard facts and figures. After all, we've all got our own methods when it comes to the mythical pount for pound title. But I just don't see how Alvarez being outside a top ten can be seen as a disservice to him.

Everyone's arguments have merit in this thread and as I've already stressed, it's a tricky time to be compiling such a list, hence the disagreement.

Poor old Gonzalez. 3 weight champion, unbeaten, a champion for 6-7 years, great ko %. Where would he be if he was a bit bigger and equally successful. Its tough being a midget.

I know, the competition isn't that strong. But I'd have missed him off my list as I generally forget he exists.

88Chris05 wrote:Got to admit I forgot about Alvarez, Hammersmith. Would put him higher than Khan and Estrada, so that's thirteenth spot. Not sure I could honestly make a case for him being above all those other names you've mentioned though, and I wouldn't put him top ten.

I never really understood the buzz around the Canelo-Mayweather fight. Sticks in the craw a bit for me that it is able to hide behind all these revenue records, because as I said the other day I just don't feel it was ever a particularly significant fight. But either way, I was really, really disappointed in Alvarez's performance and I guess I'm finding that hard to shake. I appreciate he was faced with the best fighter in the world, but guys such as Cotto, Guerrero and Maidana weren't talked up anywhere near as much as Alvarez was ahead of fighting Floyd, yet he gave Mayweather less problems than any of them.

Good victories to his name and I'm a fan of his approach to taking on the challenges, but I feel he's been a bit fortunate to escape with a 2-0 record against Trout and Lara. But as you say, he got the victories which should count for a lot, I agree. I suppose I just want him to have a really clear, dominant win against a really top fighter or divisional rival before I put him in the higher bracket, and I still don't think he's had one yet.

Coxy, Brook has one win in a close, scrappy fight against Porter in terms of wins that would even come in to the equation for this type of list. I'm not putting him ahead of Khan on that win alone, regardless of whether or not Porter beat Alexander.

Will be a moot point when Khan outclasses Brook, anyway. :wink:

There was a strong chance Alvarez was weight drained for the fight. He isnt even comfortable making the 154 limit.

catchweight wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:Got to admit I forgot about Alvarez, Hammersmith. Would put him higher than Khan and Estrada, so that's thirteenth spot. Not sure I could honestly make a case for him being above all those other names you've mentioned though, and I wouldn't put him top ten.

I never really understood the buzz around the Canelo-Mayweather fight. Sticks in the craw a bit for me that it is able to hide behind all these revenue records, because as I said the other day I just don't feel it was ever a particularly significant fight. But either way, I was really, really disappointed in Alvarez's performance and I guess I'm finding that hard to shake. I appreciate he was faced with the best fighter in the world, but guys such as Cotto, Guerrero and Maidana weren't talked up anywhere near as much as Alvarez was ahead of fighting Floyd, yet he gave Mayweather less problems than any of them.

Good victories to his name and I'm a fan of his approach to taking on the challenges, but I feel he's been a bit fortunate to escape with a 2-0 record against Trout and Lara. But as you say, he got the victories which should count for a lot, I agree. I suppose I just want him to have a really clear, dominant win against a really top fighter or divisional rival before I put him in the higher bracket, and I still don't think he's had one yet.

Coxy, Brook has one win in a close, scrappy fight against Porter in terms of wins that would even come in to the equation for this type of list. I'm not putting him ahead of Khan on that win alone, regardless of whether or not Porter beat Alexander.

Will be a moot point when Khan outclasses Brook, anyway. :wink:

There was a strong chance Alvarez was weight drained for the fight. He isnt even comfortable making the 154 limit.

All you ever do is make statements without any proof......"I know that Floyd doesn't want"..."Glenn Mcrory is.........."

"Strong chance" ................There is a strong chance Schmelling threw the second Louis fight If you want to believe it...

Negative moron...

Alvarez was weight drained

Let's just leave it..............David Haye a sore toe...............That was a meaningless victory too..

That was too easy. Im disappointed. Not even an irrlevant 80s fight thrown in there to recycle an old reliable argument.