1) How good a fighter a guy is today at his weight class. 2) How good a fighter a guy is today at his weight class & whether you consider him to be big or small at the division he chooses to fight in. 3) How good a fighter a guy is today at his weight class, whether you consider him to be big or small at the division he chooses to fight in & also his career accomplishments at lower weights (for their own sake rather than an indicator of how good he is at his current weight).
The same way you make any division ranking. A mixture of your evaluation of his talent and his accomplishments at the weight. Accomplishments at other weights can also be considered as long as they're 'weighted' for their relevance to where they are now. For instance, a dominant super bantamweight moving up to feather can rightfully have his super bantamweight work factored into the analysis, though the work is handicapped in relevance since he's now a featherweight. Pac's featherweight work & Adamek's light heavyweight work don't factor into how good a welterweight/heavyweight they are in 2011, because they were a somatype ago. They factor into their historical, all time ranking massively, to a September 2011 ranking? Not even a tiny bit.
How good a fighter is, period. How versatile they are and how complete they are in their overall game, how well they deal with varying and diverse styles. That imo is the best metric for measuring a fighter in division A vs a fighter in division B.
OKay then, so let say you pull a guy down to 145lbs and that guy got beaten up with some plaster wraps.........
For the record - if you're doing it that way, a Vitali vs Floyd 'p4p match' should be envisioned as Vitali vs a slightly below average sized heavyweight with Floyd's attributes.
Listen ya dumb pict...........you were the guy who said previous accomplishments didn't matter...the entire RATIONALE for Pac being allowed to drag guys down to 145 is that HE, PAC is COMING UP in weight....yet you say that doesn't matter....that he takes the division, which has an upper limit of 147, as he sees it.
Yep. Basically just how good a fighter you think somebody is relative to others on the same list. Of course accomplishments go a long way but it's not a resume matching contest. Skills and abilities are a huge part. Simply who you think the best fighters are pound 4 pound at the time you're making/evaluating a list.
Which is part of the reason I don't have Pac p4p number one. Because he's so small at the weight. Whereas Vitali is huge relative to his weight, which is one of his main attributes as a fighter & why he's legitimately a top 6 or 7 p4p fighter. Is this really so complicated? For the record I don't have a drop of 'Pictish' teuchter blood in me.
So again I ask the question..........what business does Manny Pac have building a reputation of pfp greatness where he makes guys fight at 145??? If skills and abilities are relevant, and if your skills and abilities are affected by making the weight...just WHAT is Pac's pfp ranking built on???
He's not fucking small at the weight!!! Its the guys he is beating at 145 that are small at the weight...or have had their heads bashed in with plaster beforehand, or are ancient.......:dunno: Face it...Pacs pfp resume is built on the perception that he is a flyweight beating up welterweights......
His HISTORICAL greatness is built on that. And that's legitimate. My argument is that if people are basing his current p4p ranking on that then that is wrong. Because he's in the welterweight division today. Similarly, Hopkins might be enhancing his historical greatness by beating guys up as an old man, but doesn't/shouldn't benefit his ranking in a p4p list in september 2011, IMO. Legacy ≠ a time specific ranking, basically.
This is a very, very important issue dammit and I'll argue it passionately all night if need be!!:fightme:
Fine. In my opinion, off the basis of what you regard as the criteria for pfp..........Hopkins, Pacquaio and Floyd really shouldn't be up there, at all. Froch, really, by rights, should be pressing them for the top spot..... Pacquaio has used bargaining power to perpetuate this myth that he is a midget taking on giants.....yet Adamek is told that he really is a heavyweight, and should be judged accordingly. Hopkins is parlaying his age into "pfp greatness"........what is in fact happening is his age + his resume + the absence of anything too much better.
What about 1 and 3, but not 2? There's no option for that! Therefore, I refuse to vote! Take that pollster. Now your poll is invalid. This is like a presidential election in the U.S. - none of the choices are any good.
I disagree with you, I don't think size relative to a division has anything to do with it. Pac & Floyd could cut to 135-140 and be big or average sized LWs/JWWs, but they'd still be the same fighters, and likely even more dominant. P4P rankings shouldn't punish a fighter for fighting in a division where they actually belong (vs being 15 lbs north on fight night). In fact, being capable of doing so is in and of itself evidence of superior fighting capability. Floyd and Pac are regularly beating down guys who are much bigger than them. Again, Pac, Floyd and Nonito are it for me by the criteria I listed.
I don't understand this reasoning at all. I could see possibly being over-sighted enough to penalize fighters for fighting in weight-classes they're too big for, but I see no logical explanation for doing so because a fighter competes in a weight-class above his natural weight. It makes no sense.
Because it's a potential vulnerability at the weight & we've seen him pushed back enough times to think it might become an issue against better fighters. Probably be less confusing to call it a lack of physical strength in this discussion.
Pac had bigger fist, bicep, calf, neck measurements for his fight at 140 with Hatton and Hatton was a brute at 140. At 147, only Margarito has really displayed this supposed size-advantage over Pac.
