Mayweather's Position, All Time P4P List

[Willow The Wisp]

Ok, I get what you mean - but I don't follow your logic.

If we blow up Pep to 212 lbs (Ali's prime weight, or thereabouts)... surely he wouldn't be as fast, as he was at 126. And if we shrink Ali down to 126 - wouldn't he be much faster than at 212? I don't think we can reasonably predict, that one would be faster than the other, if they were the same size

Ahhh, but if we were to equilize their size, they change, as would their performance. A little guy is able to act against gravity differently. As such, of couse a smaller man is going to do things a larger, comparatively plodding athlete can't. A little man will normally be a better master of pure boxing craft. It's a minor point; but it does extinguish comments like "Heavyweights are so boring and ponderous ".
Of course they are....they're bigger.

Think Mayweather vs. Jarrell Miller.....on the pommel horse!!!! Different beasts due to size.

Hope this assists.

[Bundana]

Ahhh, but if we were to equilize their size, they change, as would their performance. A little guy is able to act against gravity differently. As such, of couse a smaller man is going to do things a larger, comparatively plodding athlete can't. A little man will normally be a better master of pure boxing craft. It's a minor point; but it does extinguish comments like "Heavyweights are so boring and ponderous ".
Of course they are....they're bigger.

Think Mayweather vs. Jarrell Miller.....on the pommel horse!!!! Different beasts due to size.

Hope this assists.

Yes, needless to say, if we blow up or shrink a boxer, he would perform differently, than he would at his original weight. So can we agree, that there's no way of telling, if a blown up Pep would make Ali look slow... if they were both 212 lbs?

[Willow The Wisp]

Yes, needless to say, if we blow up or shrink a boxer, he would perform differently, than he would at his original weight. So can we agree, that there's no way of telling, if a blown up Pep would make Ali look slow... if they were both 212 lbs?

Of course! No way of telling, no way of blowing anyone up, shriking one down, and no way of expecting a lightweight fighter to act like a heavyweight & vise versa. Pep simply did things that a 212 man couldn't do.

[GhostofDempsey]

Ok, I get what you mean - but I don't follow your logic.

If we blow up Pep to 212 lbs (Ali's prime weight, or thereabouts)... surely he wouldn't be as fast, as he was at 126. And if we shrink Ali down to 126 - wouldn't he be much faster than at 212? I don't think we can reasonably predict, that one would be faster than the other, if they were the same size

I think P4P assumes you maintain your best qualities across all weight classes. Otherwise there would be no point in comparing them. You can't say that if George Foreman was fighting at 135 he'd maintain his power but suddenly fight on his toes and gain a lot of speed. This is why I hesitate to include heavyweights in P4P discussions. Most of them are big and slow, carrying their respective skills down to lower divisions would be disastrous for them.

[Kid Cauliflower]

I think P4P assumes you maintain your best qualities across all weight classes. Otherwise there would be no point in comparing them. You can't say that if George Foreman was fighting at 135 he'd maintain his power but suddenly fight on his toes and gain a lot of speed. This is why I hesitate to include heavyweights in P4P discussions. Most of them are big and slow, carrying their respective skills down to lower divisions would be disastrous for them.

Ah, they are probably confused or disgruntled by my bad instructions at the beginning. You just about explained it correctly, but it appears to be of no avail. We are talking about the same thing here as with normal P4P lists, nothing different, methinks, mehopes.

I usually took P4P to mean a size adjustment. Maybe some do not interpret it that way. For some it may be as simple as saying, "I think Mayweather was a better super featherweight than Marciano was heavyweight," or something like that..

The last list was unfortunately who beats who with a size adjustment. This following one is who I think was the best among ATG fighters for their best division. No size adjustment necessary.

Use your own criteria--whatever P4P means to you.

Straight P4P list.

1. Langford
2. Robinson
3. Greb
4. Duran
5. R Leonard
6. B Leonard
7. Pep
8. Ali
9. Charles
10. Saddler
11. Griffith
12. Hagler
13. J Johnson
14. Monzon
15 Pacquiao
16 Mayweather
17 Wilde
18 Ross...
19
20........

Most likely I have overlooked someone.

[Bundana]

I think P4P assumes you maintain your best qualities across all weight classes. Otherwise there would be no point in comparing them. You can't say that if George Foreman was fighting at 135 he'd maintain his power but suddenly fight on his toes and gain a lot of speed. This is why I hesitate to include heavyweights in P4P discussions. Most of them are big and slow, carrying their respective skills down to lower divisions would be disastrous for them.

I wonder, if this is how most people look at it?

Personally, I think of how good a boxer has been in his own division - meaning how dominant he was, what he accomplished, and how strong the opposition was.

Attempting to assess where someone like Ali belongs on a P4P list, I don't try to imagine if he could beat Pep (for example), if we shrink him down to 126 lbs. Surely that makes no sense?

And what is this about big heavyweights carrying their slowness down to lower divisions? Don't you think a 250lbs HW would be a completely different boxer if shrunk down to, say, featherweight?

[Kid Cauliflower]

I wonder, if this is how most people look at it?

Personally, I think of how good a boxer has been in his own division - meaning how dominant he was, what he accomplished, and how strong the opposition was.

Attempting to assess where someone like Ali belongs on a P4P list, I don't try to imagine if he could beat Pep (for example), if we shrink him down to 126 lbs. Surely that makes no sense?

And what is this about big heavyweights carrying their slowness down to lower divisions? Don't you think a 250lbs HW would be a completely different boxer if shrunk down to, say, featherweight?

I am not promoting shrinkage anymore. Use whatever criteria you are comfortable with, since no consensus would ever be reached.

[DeeMoney]

Ahhh, but if we were to equilize their size, they change, as would their performance. A little guy is able to act against gravity differently. As such, of couse a smaller man is going to do things a larger, comparatively plodding athlete can't. A little man will normally be a better master of pure boxing craft. It's a minor point; but it does extinguish comments like "Heavyweights are so boring and ponderous ".
Of course they are....they're bigger.

Think Mayweather vs. Jarrell Miller.....on the pommel horse!!!! Different beasts due to size.

Hope this assists.

Yes, thats why it is relative to their weight class, and assuming that all physical attributes remain relatively the same.

I'll use numbers for example, but thats just to simplify for the explanation. Lets assume a baseline of 100 being the average for any skillset or athletic ability of a title contender at a given weight class. So a heavyweight contender who has 100 strength has what we would consider the average strength for a heavyweight contender, a welterweight who has average power for a welterweight would have 100 power.

Obviously, the heavyweight who has 100 power has more actual power than the welterweight, but on a P4P relative scale, they are equal. So, this idea of 'simply blowing someone up' is NOT what is taking place, rather we are putting the boxer at a mythical pound 4 pound weight, but imbuing upon them their relative athletic ability.

So, if there was a very strong, hard hitting lightweight who had say 120 power, but also had very good stamina- 110, then we don't just blow him up and say, "oh he gains power but loses his stamina." No, at this mythical P4P weight all physical attributes, RELATIVE to natural weight, remain the same. He would still be 120 & 110 at P4P. This then allows us to compare fighters from across weight classes, and start to glean what they would be able to do against someone from a disparate weight. This is what Pound for Pound means, it as if it is a per capita statement, taking it relatively speaking and then equalizing the known variable.

The problem with this, is it forces the evaluator to actually study the fighter himself, and not just their resume, which doesn't seem to be a popular task.

[Kid Cauliflower]

After I was upbraided recently for my Ross/Canzeroni/McLarnin ignorance, I began watching what is available. In nothing flat it was evident these boys actually had a wealth of boxing technique and were displaying it even as they brawled.

The purpose of Mayweather's clinches is to stop the action, be broken up then start over in the center of the ring. But when these earlier guys clinched the action often did not stop but merely transformed into another type of punching. Their arms often remained free enough to continue the assault.

This was by design, an arm would tangle, the contestant would untangle it and proceed. They were able to hurt each other from those positions. The ref lets them stay there because their was still plenty of action, unlike today's clinches. Hardly any boxers today know how to fight from a clinch but older eras were way good at it..

True their were also uglier clinches of today's variety, but far fewer these "dry" ones. Sometimes anyone from any era will clinch to stop the action or get a breather.

They also knew how to feint and were obviously well practiced at it--not one-offs.

Fans hate clinches, especially today when no fighting goes on in them. Clinches are broken up pronto. Not as aesthetic or visible as fighting in the center of the ring. Even old time fans probably hated them, though surely not as much as we do.

The net result of their style was more clinches. This may be one reason today's fans find fights older than about sixty years distasteful and ugly. They are used to clinches being broken up quickly. Their may have been more clinches but they were clinches with hard fighting in them.

[QueensburyRules]

After I was upbraided recently for my Ross/Canzeroni/McLarnin ignorance, I began watching what is available. In nothing flat it was evident these boys actually had a wealth of boxing technique and were displaying it even as they brawled.

The purpose of Mayweather's clinches is to stop the action, be broken up then start over in the center of the ring. But when these earlier guys clinched the action often did not stop but merely transformed into another type of punching. Their arms often remained free enough to continue the assault.

This was by design, an arm would tangle, the contestant would untangle it and proceed. They were able to hurt each other from those positions. The ref lets them stay there because their was still plenty of action, unlike today's clinches. Hardly any boxers today know how to fight from a clinch but older eras were way good at it..

True their were also uglier clinches of today's variety, but far fewer these "dry" ones. Sometimes anyone from any era will clinch to stop the action or get a breather.

They also knew how to feint and were obviously well practiced at it--not one-offs.

Fans hate clinches, especially today when no fighting goes on in them. Clinches are broken up pronto. Not as aesthetic or visible as fighting in the center of the ring. Even old time fans probably hated them, though surely not as much as we do.

The net result of their style was more clinches. This may be one reason today's fans find fights older than about sixty years distasteful and ugly. They are used to clinches being broken up quickly. Their may have been more clinches but they were clinches with hard fighting in them.

- - Knowledgeable fans who actually follow boxing so they can talk knowledgably about it with understanding typically downgraded l'l floydy and he CrackDaddy for his TBA short notice fights not giving his opponent a decent training camp, his last half of his career spent in Haymon's bought off MGM/Vegas Commish environs, and his fraudulent drug accusations where he had to settle $$$ in a out of court lawsuit with a public letter of apology to Manny that his then promoter fishnets Oscar also had to do...