The Real Meaning of "Pound for Pound"

[Shinkyokushin92]

It is quite annoying when you see boxers like Joshua, Wilder, Canelo, Thurman, Sor Rungvisai & even Golovkin (who is my favorite boxer) on top Pound for Pound lists.

My understanding of the P4P meaning is who is the skilled/best boxer if you take out the factor of weight differences.

I would consider the following:

1. Resume - Have they fought a beat a solid list of fighters including current/ex-champions, top contenders & gatekeepers?

2. Eye-Test - Just by observing them fight, is it apparent that they are highly skilled and possess many great qualities including power, speed, ring IQ, technique, movement/footwork, etc.

3.If skills they possess and which make them effective in their ordinary weight class can both be applied to & just as effective in a higher or lower weight class, then this should give them P4P consideration.

When I think P4P, I think of fighters like Lomachenko, Crawford, Mikey Garcia, Errol Spence Jr. These are the types of guys who can apply there skills and still be effective and dominant in other weight classes. These guys rely on other skills other than just power or size to win fights.

GGG for example has many skills. But his main tool is a jab, constant effective pressure and KO power in both hands. The style he fights won't be effective a SMW or LHW.

[mvooom]

You are right about P4P list, I also wonder how some of the names there get so high up when I see skilled guys beating them.

Guys like Canelo, a good fighter but I see him as more of a "fighter" a guy who struggles and digs deep to win. He would get schooled by certain fighters.

As for GGG, his style will be effective up to LHW due to his chin and extreme power but beyond that, he would start having serious issues. The power above is too much. While the skills of the lower weights, guys like Crawford and Loma will be too much.

I still rate GGG a top 5 P4P, probably at 4 below Loma, Crawford, Mikey. He hates body shots and Spence wont let his body take a 2 sec break but GGG also have the power to stop him. 4 and 5 will be a toss up between both of them.

I rated pre-Ward Kovalev higher then GGG, he is a far better boxer than GGG and Canelo with KO power in both hands.

Also, I feel P4P slots can be vacant like Loma as 1 while 2 will be vacant till Crawford proves himself some more. For now, Crawford should be 3 and so on.

[Redd Foxx]

Remember, due to physical differences, smaller guys don't usually fight or win fights the same way big guys do. You won't see any HWs moving like Manny Pac and you won't see many FWs sending guys into seizures after a few punches like Wilder. Certain traits don't move up and down. The idea of P4P is rating who the best are, without just picking the biggest.

[Robbie Barrett]

Just stick to who they beat all that eye test crap is nonsense. So many fighters look fantastic when fighting low level opposition and then don't look so good when they step up.

[DumpkinsPlus5]

Remember, due to physical differences, smaller guys don't usually fight or win fights the same way big guys do. You won't see any HWs moving like Manny Pac and you won't see many FWs sending guys into seizures after a few punches like Wilder. Certain traits don't move up and down. The idea of P4P is rating who the best are, without just picking the biggest.

Exactly. OP used the original meaning of the term P4P which I avoid because I don't feel it's fair to the big guys. Smaller guys are always gonna LOOK more skilled because less mass typically leads to more agility which leads to more finesse.

The ole "If everyone was the same weight class" always tends to favor the smaller fighter for this reason. It's as if people don't realize that at equal size, no fighter will move the same. I like to keep things fair and simple. The fighter with the best resume is the best fighter in the sport.

Just stick to who they beat all that eye test crap is nonsense. So many fighters look fantastic when fighting low level opposition and then don't look so good when they step up.

I agree 100%

[craigus1990]

P4P doesn't mean anything.
All you can do is look at how dominant a fighter is.... and if they're dominating against the best opposition possible.
Don't worry about the P4P stuff....
Why does it matter?
Loma is very good.... so is GGG..... so is Bud.... so is Garcia.... etc..... Why do we need to pretend like we can somehow metaphysically order them by fantasising how their styles would work against each other, or at different weights? That's just fantasy nonsense..... It's like children arguing which superhero would win in a fight.... it is pointless.

[TheBigLug]

P4P is just subjective and essentially pointless.

Guys like Andre Ward beat other guys considered top p4p fighters, so they can be called one of the best in the sport, but then for example, it's not Crawford's fault that his divisions have been mostly weak. It doesn't mean he isn't one of the best.

All you can do is just be the best in the division you campaign at. It serves no purpose to compare GGG and Lomachenko or whatever. It's a mythical thing.

If a guy fights the best around his weight, that's good enough for me. It doesn't matter what number they are on a fantasy list.

[BoxingIsGreat]

What you have these days aren't P4P lists, they are lists of who one thinks are the current best fighters in the world. Some of the criteria mostly used are skill (eye test) and resume (or some BS ratings based on pure hype or sympathy). Still, even in this case, I agree with you that some of the ones you mentioned don't belong there. They would fail on one criterion or both.

For example, Wilder and GGG. They neither have outstanding skills to point to nor the resume to qualify. It's all hype or sympathy.

P4P, the true meaning of the word based on pure skill, I'd would put guys like these ahead of them: Crawford, Spence, Lomachenko, Mikey, Inoue, etc.

[TheBigLug]

What you have these days aren't P4P lists, they are lists of who one thinks are the current best fighters in the world. Some of the criteria mostly used are skill (eye test) or resume (or some BS ratings based on pure hype or sympathy). Still, even in this case, I agree with you that some of the ones you mentioned don't belong there. They would fail on one criterion or both.

For example, Wilder and GGG. They neither have outstanding skills to point to nor the resume to qualify. It's all hype or sympathy.

P4P, the true meaning of the word based on pure skill, I'd would put guys like these ahead of them: Crawford, Spence, Lomachenko, Mikey, Inoue, etc.

I'd consider GGG equally or more skilled as skilled as guys like Spence or Mikey. Neither of them do anything special, they're just solid all round fighters like GGG.

Also, i think people get confused between flashy and skilled. GGG isn't flashy but has very educated footwork, distance control, great jab, good ring IQ etc etc. That is skill to me, which is why he has been both an excellent amateur and pro.

Then you get slick/flashy guys that people say are skilled but in reality they're not actually as skilled as many less flashy guys when you really know what you're looking at.

Many fighters with athletic abilities and look great on the eye have fallen way short because they actually don't have the skill to be at the top. Skill and style are different things. GGG is extremely skilled in the style he has.

[BoxingIsGreat]

I'd consider GGG equally or more skilled as skilled as guys like Spence or Mikey. Neither of them do anything special, they're just solid all round fighters like GGG.

Also, i think people get confused between flashy and skilled. GGG isn't flashy but has very educated footwork, distance control, great jab, good ring IQ etc etc. That is skill to me, which is why he has been both an excellent amateur and pro.

Then you get slick/flashy guys that people say are skilled but in reality they're not actually as skilled as many less flashy guys when you really know what you're looking at.

Many fighters with athletic abilities and look great on the eye have fallen way short because they actually don't have the skill to be at the top. Skill and style are different things. GGG is extremely skilled in the style he has.

Did GGG really look skilled to you in the Canelo fight? What I saw was a guy who was clueless, lost, and shooting in the dark. He could hardly land any of his power shots, while Canelo did several times. Skill for skill, Canelo is way better.