P4P best year by year over the past 50 years

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
20,961
9,271
All credit to Phil Jay from World Boxing News for the list below and I think some make for interesting conversation.


So here they are, the P4P number ones :

1970 Jan: Jose Napoles Dec: Joe Frazier

1973 Jan: George Foreman

1974 Jan: Muhammad Ali

1978 Feb: Roberto Duran Sept: Muhammad Ali

1979 Oct: Roberto Duran

1980 Nov: Sugar Ray Leonard

1982 Feb: Marvin Hagler

1987 April: Sugar Ray Leonard Aug: Mike Tyson

1990 Feb: Pernell Whitaker Mar: Julio Cesar Chavez

1993 Sep: Riddick Bowe Nov: Evander Holyfield

1994 April: Pernell Whitaker

1997 April: Oscar De La Hoya

1999 Sept: Felix Trinidad

2001 Sept: Bernard Hopkins

2002 Sept: Roy Jones Jr.

2004 May: Bernard Hopkins

2005 July: Floyd Mayweather

2010 Nov: Manny Pacquiao 2011 Sept: Floyd Mayweather

2016 Sept: Roman Gonzalez Nov: Manny Pacquiao / Andre Ward

2017 Andre Ward Sept: Gennady Golovkin

2018 Gennady Golovkin May: Vasyl Lomachenko

2019 Vasyl Lomachenko May: Canelo Alvarez August: Lomachenko

https://www.worldboxingnews.net/2020/01/29/p4p-number-one-history/
 

REDC

Professional amateur
Dec 12, 2015
2,729
926
Ask 1000000 people for their p4p list and you'll get 1000000 different answers.

The only purpose it could serve -and by "it" I mean Ring Magazine's p4p lists- would be to get an idea of who the best fighters are at the moment if you hadn't been following any boxing for a number of years and wanted to familiarize yourself with who's popular.
 

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
20,961
9,271
Ask 1000000 people for their p4p list and you'll get 1000000 different answers.

The only purpose it could serve -and by "it" I mean Ring Magazine's p4p lists- would be to get an idea of who the best fighters are at the moment if you hadn't been following any boxing for a number of years and wanted to familiarize yourself with who's popular.
I haven't seen a list yet that people don't criticize and ridicule. They are little more than conversation starters.
 
Reactions: REDC
Jun 3, 2012
15,672
14,984
Korakuen Hall
I mean, that WBN list is a load of crap really. No justification for anything. Lack of research. A skewed focus towards the heavyweight division.

I could pick holes in it all day, but late 70's Ali being considered #1 is laughable. Also Whitaker 'beats' the #1, but Bowe goes top. WTF? :lol:
 
Jun 3, 2012
15,672
14,984
Korakuen Hall
If by conversation starters you mean argument bait, then you're absolutely correct. I love it when the title says "Best Year By Year" and it skips years and inserts 2 fighters in a single year to boot.
It's poorly organised by WBN. The gaps signal that they felt a particular fighter remained at the #1 position until the next name/date pops up.

So for example:

"1994 April: Pernell Whitaker

1997 April: Oscar De La Hoya"


This means they had Whitaker as P4P#1 from April 1994 until he lost to De La Hoya in April 1997.
 

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
20,961
9,271
It's poorly organised by WBN. The gaps signal that they felt a particular fighter remained at the #1 position until the next name/date pops up.

So for example:

"1994 April: Pernell Whitaker

1997 April: Oscar De La Hoya"


This means they had Whitaker as P4P#1 from April 1994 until he lost to De La Hoya in April 1997.
That's the way I read it too.
 
Reactions: dkos
Jun 6, 2013
12,583
1,506
Ask 1000000 people for their p4p list and you'll get 1000000 different answers.

The only purpose it could serve -and by "it" I mean Ring Magazine's p4p lists- would be to get an idea of who the best fighters are at the moment if you hadn't been following any boxing for a number of years and wanted to familiarize yourself with who's popular.

LOL.

Ask 10 different boxing fans what specifically "P4P" means, and you'll get 15 answers.
 
Reactions: REDC
Jul 6, 2019
7,034
7,349
Regarding pfp. There is usually a reasonable consensus on who the current 3 - 5 best are, even if people don't agree on the order. It only really starts to get woolly once you extend the list in numbers or time frame.

I don't mind it. It's useful to bring attention to the sport and to promote fighters. It can also lead to some fun discussions.

It's not scientific, but a scientific rating isn't really possible with the way boxing runs. boxing structure.
 
Jun 6, 2012
8,111
5,663
Ali going 1 & 1 with Spinks, and regaining his P4P crown in 78, is what solidifies him, after all.
 
Jul 23, 2017
1,401
1,014
31
If Golovkin was pfp at anything that says a lot about how illegitimate that list is.