Pound For Pound

I haven't annoyed people enough with my ramblings about this lately, so it is about time:kidcool:

Andre Ward is ranked #4 at light-heavyweight (the Ring), which is reasonable enough considering that he hasn't faced top opposition of that division. He isn't rated at super-middle as he is no longer fighting there.

However, he is also ranked #4 p4p by the same magazine, the only lt. heavy above him being Kovalev.

How can a fighter be ranked ahead of fighters of his own size, p4p, if he is ranked behind them in his own weight class?

Is p4p the measurement of former success (instead of proven abilities of THIS moment, as ranking lists usually are) or is p4p about the most skillful fighter instead of the best? These are the only two explanations I can come up with.

Does this make any sense for anyone else?

 

The reason for the confusion is because you and others over-complicate the issue (deliberately).

Best P4P means, best fighter for his size. Andre Ward may be competing at 175lbs now, but he's considered a Super middle that is now competing at 175lbs. When Pacquiao was competing at 147/154 he was considered a featherweight competing at those weights. So as a Featherweight, being able to compete at Welterweight/Junior Middleweight against behemoths like De La Hoya and Margarito meant that FOR HIS SIZE Pacquiao was a better fighter than most if not all.

 

No. A fighter is the 'size' of the division he competes in. Your analogy is extra stupid because Ward has only moved up half a division as you would expect a fighter to as he ages. He can't even make 168.

Pac was p4p because he moved up to new weight classes and beat quality fighters at the weights he was now fighting at. Not because he was a feather weight that just happened to weigh 140 something pounds.

 

I would take it that he's considered better than the others at light heavy but he hasn't done enough to warrant being ranked above them in terms of what he's done at this new weight. He's not a talented prospect that they think is better than more proven guys, he's actually proven

 

They might argue that, while P4p is purely subjective, ratings in a division have to take into account what you've 'earned' in terms of beating ranked guys in that division in progressing towards a title shot?

 

Bullshit...

Pacquiao was NEVER a True Welterweight...Neither was JM Marquez...Miguel Cotto was NEVER a True Middleweight...Roy Jones was NEVER a True Heavyweight...

Being Able to Successfully COMPETE @ a Particular Weight Class Is Completely DIFFERENT from What You're Suggesting...

The Fact that the VAST MAJORITY of Elite Welters (Historically) Beats Pac and Marquez Illustrates This...Ditto for the Vast Majority of Elite Middleweights Shitkicking Miguel Cotto, and Heavyweights Wiping their Ass w/Roy Jones...

They're Naturally SMALLER Men Who had a Degree of Success @ Higher Weights, but Let's NOT Get it Twisted...







REED:nono:

 

Actually agree with terp on that one - in p4p lists guys should just be rated on their ability relative to the weight they compete at, otherwise the permutations become ridiculous....'well sure x is the middleweight champ and beat him but i reckon y cuts less weight so I'd have him higher p4p'

 

Yes, if they have always competed at that weight. But if they have been dominant at lower weights and keep moving up for challenges and are still successful you have to take that into account when evaluating them as a fighter among their generation.

 

If NOT for Pound for Pound, Twerp's Sawed Off, Diaperweight, Midget Ass Heroes WOULDN'T Have Gotten a Sliver of the Recognition they Did, Which was BARELY a Shred of a Sliver as Is...

No One Cared About or Paid Attention to the Weight Class Ricardo Lopez Campaigned In; They Cared That He was an Exceptionally TALENTED, SKILLFUL and DOMINANT Little Guy, Thus His Pound for Pound Ranking...Ditto for Chocolatito...

Pound for Pound is Only Complicated to Those that MAKE the Shit Complicated...






REED

 

In an all time sense yes, in a contemporaneous p4p list? I wouldn't say so. Pretty pointless arcane argument mind

 

This...

Which is Why REED Noted Pacquiao, Marquez, Cotto and Roy, Specifically...




REED

 

If lopez had moved up 2 weight classes and started struggling to split decisions on a regular basis hed no longer be mentioned in that breath would he? Not complicated

 

I am at the same side as Terp and Hut in this one,and Hut's speculation of the reasons behind it was a plausible one.

I can't quite follow D&M's and Reed's line of thought on this one, but since both are smart and well-educated boxing fans, I can't say that their view was wrong either. This s just something that has always puzzled me

 

That's Just It, Lopez WASN'T as Dominant or Spectacular at 108 and 112, yet his Pound for Pound Ranking Didn't Really Suffer...

Why, Because he was Never a TRUE Flyweight...




REED

 

lopez never fought at 112

 

REED Always Wants to Recall the Grigsby Fight Being @ 112 for Some Reason...






REEDalm:

 

If the p4p king retains his title despite moving up in weight, we meet trouble when he loses. For example, when Mosley beat Oscar the first time, he was ranked #1 p4p even though he wasn't going back to lightweight. Then Forrest beat him, then Mayorga beat Forrest. Some even (unfairly) named Forrest as the new p4p king, but Mayorga obviously wasn't one.

Thus, we end up in a bizarre situation where beating p4p champion who is the champion of your division does not make you a p4p champion.

For that reason, IMO a lightweight fighting at welterweight can gain 'p4p points', if he is still able to fight in his former division. He doesn't need to be the best welterweight in the world to be the best fighter, this was the case with Roy moving up. However, if the fighter stays in the new division for more than a year and has no intention of moving back, then I think we have to evaluate him again, compared to this new division.

If we only rate them as the fighter they were in their first fight then Manny has always been a flyweight, tackling welters

 

To REED's Knowledge, the Term Itself was Created to ANOINT Sugar Ray Robinson...

He was the Most Skilled and Talented Fighter ANYONE Had Seen to that Point, Yet It Wasn't Like he was Ever Going to Be Heavyweight Champ...So Instead of Labeling Him the Best Fighter in the World, they Said "Best Fighter in the World, Pound for Pound"....

REED's Point in Bringing This Up is the SIMPLICITY of the Origin...

Don't Complicate the Shit, Fellas...





REED:fightme:

 

Exactly. Best fighter in the world pound for pound. Simple

At his best weight he is the best fighter if you normalize the weight scale.

 

Agreed. Once again the ring is making a fool out of itself. completely nonsensical rankings

 

This we all can agree on. The problem would have started back then too, if somebody had been ranked ABOVE Robinson at welterweight, while SRR was the p4p king

 

Again, You're COMPLICATING It, Unnecessarily...

"Pound of Pound" is a MYTHICAL Title...It's No Different than Handicapping a MYTHICAL Match-Up or Ranking Guys All Time, "Pound for Pound"...It's NOT a "Title" that Automatically Changes Hands w/Each Ensuing Bout...

For Example, Does Roberto Duran's ALL TIME Ranking Suffer Because INFERIOR Fighters (Who were Usually Naturally BIGGER) Defeated Him???...Who's Ranked HIGHER All Time, Pound for Pound, Duran or Tommy Hearns???...Who's the BETTER Fighter All Time, Shane Mosley or Vernon Forrest???...Who's the BETTER Fighter All Time, Roy Jones or Antonio Tarver???...

When Ranking CURRENT Fighters Pound for Pound, it's Really No Different...It's NOT Soooooo Much About Their 1st Weight, but their PRIME Weight...CLEARLY, Manny Pacquiao was NEVER a True Welter...Ditto for Marquez...Same for Cotto @ 160, and Roy @ Heavy...





REED:hammert:

 

Reed just got triggered. Lol. All (both) of your negro heroes main claims to fame are moving up and cherry picking belts in place of making the fights that were suppose to happen. So I see why the "he smaller doe" logic would mean a lot to you.

 

So if a guy is prime and p4p at lightweight, can't make the weight anymore and gets ktfo 3x in a row at welter he's still pound for pound because of his "1st weight"? Stfu dude. People who move up and are p4p are p4p because they keep winning and adding accomplishments. Not because they had a bonus multiplier coming into the new weight.

 

WHOthefuck is Triggered???...And Please SPARE REED Your Typewritten "Laughter", Dumbfuck...It's 2016 and Fightbeat's Got EMOTICONS for that Shit...

Your Debating Style is TRANSPARENT...When you CAN'T Argue the Point Presented, You CHILDISHLY Claim Bias...That's WEAKER than a Motherfucker Cutting Weight to Make 105lbs...

Fuck w/REED's LOGIC (for 1nce), Or Shut the Fuck Up...That's as SIMPLE as the Premise of Being "The Best Fighter in the World, Pound for Pound"...






REED:hammert:

 

If the Former "Prime Lightweight" Can Noooooooo Looooooooooonger Make the Weight Anymore, that's Generally Because he's Noooooooo Loooooooooooooonger in his Fucking Prime, TROLL...So Getting KTFO 3x in a Row, 2 Weights HIGHER than Lightweight, Only BOLSTERS the Point that Dude Was Indeed PAST His Prime...

It's a SIMPLE Premise, Really...But Given YOUR Pedophilic Affinity for Diaperweight Fighters, it's No Wonder You COMPLICATE Something as Elementary as "Pound for Pound"...




REED:hammert:

 

Which you evaluate how? How good a guy is at his weight adjusted for how much weight you think he cuts or doesn't cut or how easily you imagine he could move down a division? There's nothinh 'simple' about that - it's more complicated

 

Pound for pound is a simple concept. UGO and others are deliberately muddying it so that we eventually stop discussing it. It has already worked on the mythical Matchups forum and eventually it'll work on here.

I don't know what's so hard to understand. Who is the best fighter when you normalize size.

 

I don't know what's so hard to understand that there's nothing simple about 'normalising for size' within a single weight class. If you considered floyd a better welterweight than pacquiao in 2012, and expected him to beat pac, might you nonetheless have had pacquiao above him p4p on thd basis that pacquiao was smaller? Against common opponents should your evaluation of their performance as it applied 'p4p' have handicapped floyd by a couple of rounds on the cards? It's just a total muddle - they were both welterweights, you rate their ability where they are

 

Why would I or anyone want to stop discussing it? It is the other way around: I find the concept interesting but I would have to understand it to be able to discuss. If it can't be defined, then it can't be discussed either.

Also, I can't believe a schmuck like me would be so influential that I would have single-handidly destroyed the p4p MMs. I would believe that others too are having difficulties of defining them

I understand the part 'best fighter when you normalize size'. What I do NOT understand is, how can a fighter A be worse than fighter B, yet better than him p4p, when they fight in the same division? This is where I always get back to

And yes I understand that Roy Jones wasn't a heavyweight as he moved up to heavyweight for one fight. However I do not understand how Floyd Mayweather is not a welterweight or Andre Ward a light heavyweight, even though they have fought in that division for years.

If you don't include weight classes at all, saying perhaps that Manny Pac would beat the other welterweights if he had their reach and strength, then you are not talking about the best fighter anymore but the most skillful one, since Pac is a welterweight and a featherweight Pac doesn't exists