| Home  |  Daily News  |  H.C.B. Boards |  Ring Girls  |  Fight Schedule  |  Hard Core Boxing Fight Gear  |  Contact  | 
newhardcore30 (16K)
Feature Partner
wpayton34 (8K)
0_5Dmain_07 (7K)

Banner 10000009



0_BOXStairs (12K) Attacking P4P debate “Unprofessionally” Rnd 1

Kimo Morrison - 10/08/2004

Being a Hard Core boxing fan I have become interested in judging a person by first impressions as to whether they happen to be as Hard Core about boxing as I am. What I have found out is by asking this one simple question to any one given person and always get the answer I’m seeking is by asking. “Who’s in your ton ten p4p?” Knowing fully well that NO MATTER WHAT they say, I can and will debated it with my own. If after the conversation is done, you hate them…they are Hard Core enough to be family!

I have my own p4p just as fight fans across the globe. Like a snowflake they each differ a little even if just microscopically, and for this reason, I have yet to see one put up on ANY website that gained praise. When you can show me just one that has been published in print paper or cyber that has not received negative feed back then I want to end with my own peek and be the myth buster. Having this discussion a million times with guys till we were ready to find out which one of us were p4p better. Until tonight I have answered every question posed on my p4p but one. “Okay, what are the rules”. Rules? Well they are my rules of course…what the hell are you thinking? Okay well there seems to be the key unlocking the debate even further, but in an attempt to narrow it in the end. If we want to get technical as I often do in heated debates as to reason for this guy or that, we need to get really technical to solve this boxing world global war. We need to some sort of war time ethics. A Geniva Convention of sorts as to make guide lines on the debate. We can pick one representative from every magazine and website in the country to send it a general set of rules, with which we then consider them all throwing out all duplicates. They can be extended in depth later but with that there should be a good general outline structure. If you are still following then you’ll like this, but if you’re already lost… turn back now this dark hole isn’t safe to enter!

I’ll be the first to submit my list of general rules that I feel merit p4p listing with a follow up tomorrow maybe starting what will be the nets version of a mini series of articles each one detailing classification of my top ten. Guidelines I follow.

Number ONE rule to be discussed is whether or not Heavy Weight fighters should be in or out! This needs to be answered due to the confusion of what p4p really means. Pound for Pound man on the earth fighting pro? Why is this so important? Because when p4p was first brought to the lips of man even before that was the politically correct term it was assumed that a heavy weight man of any given stature non the less champion would crush any man out there thus excluding him for size. That was then and this is now and in this we are seeing so much division jumping that a guy who may weigh 190 yesterday and the best p4p fighter may fight 3 months from now may be fighting for a Heavy Weight title so being born big should NOT exclude heavies period! If so then we need a more detailed title for the argument itself. Not to confuse.

Next I think that one man should have at least 25 fights to be even considered, maybe even 30 due to the fact that we need to be sure of depth and variety in styles. This rules to make sure that a guy can’t slide on without facing more than just one or two styles of fighters. Depth in a resume is where structure should be based for is it fair to put a man on who has NEVER atleast ONCE faced a southpaw fighter? No, because styles make fights and to be p4p and never face a “southy” you have not dealt with awkwardness and inconformity to rhythm in the ring.

Next is knock out ratio, and where should the bar be set? Does a guy have to have power? And if yes, how much? I think that 50% ratio is a good start. If you have someone on your top ten that doesn’t let me know. Cause I can’t think of one I would even consider that doesn’t have at least a 50/50 wreckage bill.

Diversity can be broke up into two sub heads offence and defense. What type of arsenal do they have? Are they strictly three punch fundamentalist type or a free style physics phenom with as many ways to attack as are available on any compass in terms of degrees. I don’t believe that offensive “arsenal” is not a factor so I rule no scale because all it takes is one, and it only depends on if they hit not from which angle. Defense should have a slight role in the book of rules. If a fighter has no means of disengagement available to him or none has yet been seen in a fight, then he hasn’t faced opposition enough to be considered. He must have at least one fight in which he has been forced to recover momentarily and had to defend without offence to continue. Even that had been seen in Roy Jones once or twice before Tarver got to him.

Chin, do they have one? Have they taken heat. Have they EVER faced a pure power fighter? At least once in career. Here we must define power puncher… a fighter with a 70% knock out ratio would be good start, with over 2/3 ending early. If no then they don’t make it.

Have they ever been taken long? Has the fighter ever been taken deep enough to pull have to dig deep. It doesn’t necessarily have to be the distance but far enough to know if they have any conditioning whatsoever and conditioning must be present. A fighter must have at least one fight that goes to the eighth .

Have they EVER been knocked down in a fight? This is a tricky one because if they haven’t the question will always be what if he got hit cleanly? This is why I feel that a fighter who should already have a 25 pro fight minimum, and most likely has amateur experience, should be able to find one knock down somewhere. Just one ever so as to know that they been touched by another fighter.

Have they ever fought a top ten fighter in the division. This one really speaks for itself but I have seen guys that held European fighters that may be considered if you knew anyone on their resume. Must have one.

Has the fighter ever left his weight division? This is one I am confronted with all the time for those that hate on guys like Hopkins for never taking chances with bigger punchers. My answer to that is this, If the guy has the chin of Frankenstein at whatever weight he starts at and he faces the BEST punchers of that division at some point in time, why does he have to move up? Secondly a man who conditions himself properly and doesn’t have to purge to drop it in the first place should not be penalized. In addition to this, a man who starts later in life as apposed to starting at say 15 years of age as some do has already fully matured physically and there for will grow no more and can comfortably make the same weight all through their career.

One I will throw out there that is up for controversy because many have fighters on a list for that reason alone is heart. Should a fighters heart factor p4p material. Theoretically and logically no. Reason being is that heart is something that can’t be measured statistically and also varies not only from fighter to fighter but from fight to fight with the SAME fighter. I have seen guys take beating you never thought possible to watch them later have less than average mental gas. I think that it is too touchy to let in.

Adaptation must be a quality. The fighter must have some form of adaptability to be shown in any given circumstance. This is a loaded rule though as to the definition of adapting. If one has ever been forced to change tactics in a fight for any reason being taken out of their natural element justifies adaptation, and shows strategy.

Do they have to be champion? Not in my opinion, but to own a championship belt of some recognition would be recommended not required. For those that are moving up some have not achieved these goals yet and it should be considered. It may be good to have one at some point in career, that is up for talks. What about a guy who has never had the opportunity to fight for a belt but has tried with all intense porpose. For example, some may have Rikki Hatton, who has never owned a recognized title. Has the chance been available? For debate I say.

What about fighters in less than par fields of competition due to a completely lackluster division? This is not a factor that by the fighter can be controlled in ANY way, shape, or form and should serve no bearing. Guys who properly move up have to at some point leave great divisions to go to divisions not so deep and if staying there just to clean it up no matter how little sweeping he must do ought not be penalized. And those staying in those divisions ruling for extended periods should not be blamed if they fight all comers.

How best compare 105lb fighters to heavy weight with no REAL way of EVER knowing? By looking at resume of quality fighter fought. Not the quality of the fighters themselves individual but the quality comparable to competition. Has the man faced a dozen top three men or three? No matter if it is the same fighter or not, each fight is different and the fighter whether faced before or not is ranked by bodies differently with each fight. Example some fighters have fought 17 champion quality men (hypothetical now settle) and the other 12 champion quality men but the names of the champions they have fought when put on a list equal the same because one man has fought they same men in 4 different rematches or something like that. Understand? So it comes down to who has fought higher quality opposition more often in total not names.

How and when does a loss effect a fighter. How far should a champion fall in defeat, why, and does the man who beat him take his place. I think each should be looked at individually but I think a top guy should NEVER be dropped more two slots at any given time. And the man beating him should only replace him IF he was within a top ten to begin with. If he comes from no where and beats a man luckily but has never beat anyone else noteworthy or only a fraction of the same competition, he should only be considered for the last on the list not surpassing all others without ever being considered before any one particular fight. Consecutive losses on the other hand can move one down the latter quicker with each loss depending on ranking of fighters lost to and whether the fights were all in transition to higher weights or not.

This is a good start to rules within a structured format, their may be some missed and I would love to hear them, or some thought not worth judgment, this is where we should start the debate so that when arguing YOUR pound for pound list you have something to refer too in making your calls and you can compare each of yours in detail to the enemy defying your knowledge who better stay out of arms length!

What are your thoughts, good, bad and ugly. Add some slash some but lets define the structure in which to base our argument. Or just shut the hell up because I am right and you have NO argument for me in which to base your list.

I will spare the debate on my list for until there are rules I don’t feel like playing the game and is why I don’t like this list to begin with. For it is ALL one mans opinion with nothing more than because you think so. And I for one think you all think too much!

Next Chapter "All Time p4p does the critera change and if it does why, and how much. I believe that it does change a little based on the fact that modern technology has brought a string of more efficient punchers due to knowledge of anatomy. As well as the fact that with some of the losses sustained by historical fighters came under conditions never realized by those today. Example a 26th round KO to Jack Johnson by Jess Willard. These are conditions that in this modern era will never be seen and requires special attention to detail in ruling. How's that to make you brains twist and turn thinking of what your rules are and why? Have you ever REALLY written yours rules for your Top Ten? Bet you haven't. This is just a drop in the ocean but with everybody in our highly communicative boxing universe, we should be able to ge the ball rolling so to set some standards. Whose with me?

unprofessionalguys@yahoo.com

The “Unprofessionalguy”

Discuss This Now on the HCB Boxing Board




Copyright © 2003 Hard Core Boxing  Privacy Statement