Your Interpretation Of P4P

[Mr Mitts]

There seems to be some duality in interpreting the acronym P4P. Traditionally I think it meant something like: if boxers were all the same size Sugar Ray would be the champ of 'em all.

But there is a second line of reasoning which places great emphasis on the proven ability to fight up in weight a la Walker and Duran.

Under that criterion Robinson does not score as well as some others. In his only LH fight he lost by KO when he was still a good version of himself. This good, experienced version of himself, however, was not smart enough to win, which he should have done easily. It was an easy fight other than the heat. Maxim had little to offer. All Ray had to do is diminish his output slightly and it would have been a walkaway win. Not smart enough though, not enough of a ring general to win instead of passing out. It is my opinion Sugar Ray Leonard would have won that fight as easily as Robinson should have.

Like me, maybe you have mixed criteria when it comes to P4P. What do you say?

[QueensburyRules]

There seems to be some duality in interpreting the acronym P4P. Traditionally I think it meant something like: if boxers were all the same size Sugar Ray would be the champ of 'em all.

But there is a second line of reasoning which places great emphasis on the proven ability to fight up in weight a la Walker and Duran.

Under that criterion Robinson does not score as well as some others. In his only LH fight he lost by KO when he was still a good version of himself. This good, experienced version of himself, however, was not smart enough to win, which he should have done easily. It was an easy fight other than the heat. Maxim had little to offer. All Ray had to do is diminish his output slightly and it would have been a walkaway win. Not smart enough though, not enough of a ring general to win instead of passing out. It is my opinion Sugar Ray Leonard would have won that fight as easily as Robinson should have.

Like me, maybe you have mixed criteria when it comes to P4P. What do you say?

- -The best fighter 4 his lbs today Inoue and Usyk…

[billeau2]

You do realize the Robinson fought up from Lightweight, through to Welter (where many think he was greatest) then to Middle weight and eventually to Light heavy. Some fighters did this more regularly versus more sporadically, you want to call this a "Duality" which is fine... But what it actually does is make for different criteria, perhaps to such a degree that "pound for pound" criteria changes considerably. A junkyard dog who guarded his division like Hagler, versus an wandering samurai (Ronin) like Archie Moore...

I believe that the criteria is existential, more a reflection on the writer than the fighter. Greatness is always a mixture of talent and opportunity, things never change... what does change is how we look at the product of this equation.

[GhostofDempsey]

For me P4P suggests how a fighter would perform in any other weight class with their known strengths and weaknesses. Imagine Inoue as a cruiserweight or Pep with his defensive skills at Heavyweight and only marginal punching power. This is why I have trouble ranking heavies at lower P4P weight classes. If Foreman takes his punch power and chin down to 135 but still moves very slow with plodding footwork and poor defense how does that play out? While he was a great HW, he doesn’t rank high as a P4P.

[Mr Mitts]

You do realize the Robinson fought up from Lightweight, through to Welter (where many think he was greatest) then to Middle weight and eventually to Light heavy. Some fighters did this more regularly versus more sporadically, you want to call this a "Duality" which is fine... But what it actually does is make for different criteria, perhaps to such a degree that "pound for pound" criteria changes considerably. A junkyard dog who guarded his division like Hagler, versus an wandering samurai (Ronin) like Archie Moore...

I believe that the criteria is existential, more a reflection on the writer than the fighter. Greatness is always a mixture of talent and opportunity, things never change... what does change is how we look at the product of this equation.

I know Robinson fought at featherweight and lightweight as an amateur and maybe lightweight briefly(?) as a pro, so would be able to make those weights on the day of the fight. I always figured Ray's "mature" athletic boxing weight would have been as a junior middleweight, which did not exist then, as far as I know.

With Ray it was a case of growing out of even the welterweight division where he spent his exact prime, whereas Pacquiao by contrast never needed to go to welterweight--which was more of a financial and legacy move for him.

Ray probably looked a bit gaunt as a welterweight a la Hearns, but could make the weight. Then it became punishment. 154 would have been great but 160 it was forced to be. He was only 6 lbs. north of what I figure was his best mature weight, which he could have made for years I believe. By the time he reached Maxim he had entered at the least the penumbra of his prime--the very best Robinson was by then part of the past.

The thing is, he could have beaten Maxim too, not only on some other day but on that day as well, with only a tad more ring generalship and a tad fewer punches. As a ring general he would not make the top 20 AT IMO, because if you spend your wad too early that is not good planning or the best thinking.

The criterion I favor is how good you were in your prime division. These days I do not take moving up as seriously as some. Who was the best fighter at his own prime weight? And then by extension that is the best P4P fighter. I do not know of Robinson ever being in jeopardy of losing as a welterweight, other than the real loss to Lamotta.

[QueensburyRules]

I know Robinson fought at featherweight and lightweight as an amateur and maybe lightweight briefly(?) as a pro, so would be able to make those weights on the day of the fight. I always figured Ray's "mature" athletic boxing weight would have been as a junior middleweight, which did not exist then, as far as I know.

With Ray it was a case of growing out of even the welterweight division where he spent his exact prime, whereas Pacquiao by contrast never needed to go to welterweight--which was more of a financial and legacy move for him.

Ray probably looked a bit gaunt as a welterweight a la Hearns, but could make the weight. Then it became punishment. 154 would have been great but 160 it was forced to be. He was only 6 lbs. north of what I figure was his best mature weight, which he could have made for years I believe. By the time he reached Maxim he had entered at the least the penumbra of his prime--the very best Robinson was by then part of the past.

The thing is, he could have beaten Maxim too, not only on some other day but on that day as well, with only a tad more ring generalship and a tad fewer punches. As a ring general he would not make the top 20 AT IMO, because if you spend your wad too early that is not good planning or the best thinking.

The criterion I favor is how good you were in your prime division. These days I do not take moving up as seriously as some. Who was the best fighter at his own prime weight? And then by extension that is the best P4P fighter. I do not know of Robinson ever being in jeopardy of losing as a welterweight, other than the real loss to Lamotta.

- - Manny definitely needed welter after a lifetime of starvation as a kid and in boxing making unnaturally low weights for him.

[Marchegiano]

A promo title and promo rating at best, fanboyism at worst.

A means of selling SRR in an era when HWs were all that mattered.

A metric for measuring skills without measuring weight

A metric for who is most adaptable to any weight

A metric for measuring whose record is best across weight classes

I honestly try to key into the person doing the asking or telling's meaning of the term so that I can talk to them rather than argue semantics.

Likewise, you will not catch me arguing about any ranking order that deals with the same principles. If you think SRR, Pac, SRL, then TBE, cool, bet I can guess what p4p means to you. If you reckon Floyd, Armstrong, RJJ, then Fitzs, cool, bet I can guess what p4p means to you.

If you're a record whore I see no reason to try to make you into a feats ****er. I do think it's worth my time to talk to you about records though.

[The D3vil]

To me, it's a combination of the eye test & resume

I think Bam Rodriguez maybe the current best fighter in the world if everybody was the same size.

I wouldn't bet against him

But Usyk, Crawford, Beterbiev, & Inoue are all older & have proven themselves more, so I have them ahead of him.

[Mr Mitts]

A promo title and promo rating at best, fanboyism at worst.

A means of selling SRR in an era when HWs were all that mattered.

A metric for measuring skills without measuring weight

A metric for who is most adaptable to any weight

A metric for measuring whose record is best across weight classes

I honestly try to key into the person doing the asking or telling's meaning of the term so that I can talk to them rather than argue semantics.

Likewise, you will not catch me arguing about any ranking order that deals with the same principles. If you think SRR, Pac, SRL, then TBE, cool, bet I can guess what p4p means to you. If you reckon Floyd, Armstrong, RJJ, then Fitzs, cool, bet I can guess what p4p means to you.

If you're a record whore I see no reason to try to make you into a feats ****er. I do think it's worth my time to talk to you about records though.

I like this a lot.

[JAB5239]

- - Manny definitely needed welter after a lifetime of starvation as a kid and in boxing making unnaturally low weights for him.

What makes you say unnaturally low weights? The average Philipino 17 year old weighs 117lbs, the average adult 124lbs. Not saying Manny didn't go thru rough times, a lot of boxers have. But how do you know his personal growth rate?