British Top 30 P4P March 2008

[Horse]

Horse. Who the feck are you and why are you so precious?

And don't reply with: "I'd rather not say"

I am Horse, that is all you need to know. I didn't know one needed to be precious to want to withhold information about one's self. If people really want to know I will say where I am from, but I didn't think it was that important.

How has Arthur got a better resume than Macarinelli, in what universe? He is fighting Haye at the weekend, has beaten Braithwaite and is WBO champ.

Arthur is fighting Guzman next month who is quite arguably better than Haye. Arthur is also the WBO interim champion which is not really that much inferior to the full belt, in many cases.

I appreciate Arthur going the "traditional" route in winning the British, Commonwealth and European titles and having the Lonsdale belt to keep and with wins over Limond, Docherty, Sinitsin, Burns, Gulyakevich, Gogoladze, Foster etc.

Maccarinelli has good wins as well, with wins over Scott, Hobson(x2), Dominguez, Braithwaite and some WBO/WBU defences against half decent guys, but I just feel Arthur has had the tougher fights and his opponents have been less handpicked.

[Horse]

Why when Kristjansen is not Khan's best opponent.

I feel I can move Khan up if he beats Kristjansen, even though he wil not be Khan's best opponent, as it shows Khan can continue to beat decent fighters without any accidents.

Are you really suggesting that a fighter can only move up if they have beaten their best opponent to date in their last fight?

[Mario]

Jesus, where do i begin?! I cant be bothered to go throught the hassle of quoting everything you said properly cos it'll take far too long, but so many flaws...

"Arthur is fighting Guzman next month who is quite arguably better than Haye" - You cant say he has a better resume because of who he's planning to fight, i dont need to tell you why thats just stupid. And inconsistant with your other criteria for ranking people.

Im not a fan of Derry Mathews, he seems like a knob, he isnt great to watch, and hes not going beyond Euro level IMO but not to put him in the top 30? strange to say the least.

Also you said "i can't move Matthews into the list next month even if I wanted to. Number two would be that it would show that he can be consistantly succesful against this level of compeition, and that his previous victory over Foster was not a fluke." Gavin Rees hasnt yet proven that his last win wasn't a fluke, and he certainly hasn't performed consistantly against decent opponents and winning a belt doesnt make him a world champion before you say that.

Scott Harrison at 9? Absolute joke.

No Kevin Mitchell but room for Simpson (embarrased by a journeyman in his last fight), McCulloch (has not beaten a decent opponent since 1998, im not kidding, check his record, 10 fornicating years ago!), Dunne (who has he beaten apart from Pickering?)

Just a complete mess. Theres so much more but im getting tired now.

[Horse]

Yes, but he won last month.... even if it was now a slight oversight/mis judgment on your behave (which you now seem to be hinting towards) - couldn't have said "well he can move up cause he won last month).... the Marsh fight was fairly recent too.

I didn't think his last win was good enough to move him into the list. The guy he beat didn't seem very good, and if I have not moved him up for his better wins, then I am not going to include him for beating that guy.

Marsh has surely proven himself as a fringe British level with his wins over Rocky Dean.

I am not saying he was a complete unknown, but Marsh proving himself to be at least at fringe British title level does not make him a big win for Matthews, just a decent win.

[Horse]

why cant you admit you just forgot about matthews and add him

because it is a british top 30 - and he is 100% within that top thirty

Bit hard for him to say that, I've been reminding him practically every month since I saw John Simpson's name there.

Yes, there has been no oversight. I have known about all of Matthews fights since the Foster win and have consciously decided not to include him, rightly or wrongly.

I think a case, although not a particularly strong one, could be made not to have Matthews there - for example, he could eliminate Simpson and a few others for the likes of Danny Williams, Sprott, Lockett, Macklin, Eastman, maybe even David Barnes, Lenny Daws (the later two for wins over McIntyre and Colin Lynes). Being a different weight to Matthews a case could be made - not one I would agree with.

But to have Simpson ahead of a guy he lost too albeit controvesially, who has also beaten another guy who has beaten Simpson - well its a bit silly and just shows subjectivity.

It has to be said three of the four fighters who gets the most attentions from this list are - Harrison, Arthur (for being ahead of Enzo Mac), and Simpson (for being ahead of Matthews) - hence my question on Horse's nationality. The other one is Wayne McCullough.

I admit that it is controversial not to have Matthews in the list. Hopefully, the Matthews vs Foster rematch happens and that it is not a draw, so I can put the Matthews saga behind me.

[stujones]

Simple question.... NOW, do you consider Matthews a top 30 P4P - cause you're giving a bit misleading vibes.

[Horse]

Jesus, where do i begin?! I cant be bothered to go throught the hassle of quoting everything you said properly cos it'll take far too long, but so many flaws...

"Arthur is fighting Guzman next month who is quite arguably better than Haye" - You cant say he has a better resume because of who he's planning to fight, i dont need to tell you why thats just stupid. And inconsistant with your other criteria for ranking people.

I didn't say he had a better resume because he was fighting Guzman next. I was simply replying to Captain Hook's comment about Maccarinelli fighting Haye next, as a positve point for Maccarinelli, when debating whom should be higher in the rankings between Arthur and Maccarinelli.

Im not a fan of Derry Mathews, he seems like a knob, he isnt great to watch, and hes not going beyond Euro level IMO but not to put him in the top 30? strange to say the least.

Also you said "i can't move Matthews into the list next month even if I wanted to. Number two would be that it would show that he can be consistantly succesful against this level of compeition, and that his previous victory over Foster was not a fluke." Gavin Rees hasnt yet proven that his last win wasn't a fluke, and he certainly hasn't performed consistantly against decent opponents and winning a belt doesnt make him a world champion before you say that.

I made the comment about Matthews beating Foster again showing that the first win was not a fluke, in response to a post by stujones asking what Matthews beating Foster again would prove. The same would apply to Rees if he beat M'Baye again.

Scott Harrison at 9? Absolute joke.

No Kevin Mitchell but room for Simpson (embarrased by a journeyman in his last fight), McCulloch (has not beaten a decent opponent since 1998, im not kidding, check his record, 10 effing years ago!), Dunne (who has he beaten apart from Pickering?)

Simpson had trouble with Hamidi, the same fighter who troubled Hunter in his last fight, the same fighter who Burns only narrowly beat and the same fighter who was also giving Gomez trouble before Gomez managed to stop him. So, Simpson having trouble with Hamidi is not hugely embarassing with that in mind, as Hamidi is a lot better than his record suggests.

McCullough has not had a big win for a while, but he had been losing closely against World class opposition in World title fights just before his long layoff, and had the reigning European champion running scared from a fight with him just last december. I would like to respond to the "not beaten a decent opponent since 1998" comment, but unfortunately I cannot access the Boxrec records database, so could not really respond to that comment with any real accuracy.

Dunne defended his European title a couple of times and also had some decent wins before he beat pickering.

Just a complete mess. Theres so much more but im getting tired now.

Please, post more when you are less tired.

[Horse]

Simple question.... NOW, do you consider Matthews a top 30 P4P - cause you're giving a bit misleading vibes.

I think he is good enough to be in the top 30, but as he is not in my top 30, I do not consider him a top 30 fighter. So, no I do not consider him a top 30 fighter, but he is currently my "31st" ranked fighter and is in pole position for a place on the list.

[Captain Hook]

Why do you even do this list?

Is it just for this site or does it go elsewhere?

Are you an 'expert' or just some bloke who does it for his own entertainment?! It's bizarre.

[stujones]

Simple question.... NOW, do you consider Matthews a top 30 P4P - cause you're giving a bit misleading vibes.

I think he is good enough to be in the top 30, but as he is not in my top 30, I do not consider him a top 30 fighter. So, no I do not consider him a top 30 fighter, but he is currently my "31st" ranked fighter and is in pole position for a place on the list.

But you've admited that your initial ranking of him was harsh?

[stujones]

Why do you even do this list?

Is it just for this site or does it go elsewhere?

Are you an 'expert' or just some bloke who does it for his own entertainment?! It's bizarre.

Well it might be a bizarre hobby, I keep a UK rankings in each devision purely for my own entertainment. So I see nowt wrong with it - although it would be nice to know if they are on anywhere else.

The rankings do no harm, do provide some talking points and Horse does argue its points quite validly and aren't an absolute joke. So I encourage Horse to continue them.

[Horse]

Why do you even do this list?

I can't quite recall the exact reason for starting to do it, but I probably just thought it would be interesting.

The reason I continue to do it? Why not?

Is it just for this site or does it go elsewhere?

It is just for this site.

Are you an 'expert' or just some bloke who does it for his own entertainment?! It's bizarre.

I'd rather not say.

[Horse]

Simple question.... NOW, do you consider Matthews a top 30 P4P - cause you're giving a bit misleading vibes.

I think he is good enough to be in the top 30, but as he is not in my top 30, I do not consider him a top 30 fighter. So, no I do not consider him a top 30 fighter, but he is currently my "31st" ranked fighter and is in pole position for a place on the list.

But you've admited that your initial ranking of him was harsh?

Which was my initial ranking of him? Just because my decisions were harsh it does not mean that I disagree with them, or feel that Matthews should be in the top 30. Am I confusing people now?

Why do you even do this list?

Is it just for this site or does it go elsewhere?

Are you an 'expert' or just some bloke who does it for his own entertainment?! It's bizarre.

Well it might be a bizarre hobby, I keep a UK rankings in each devision purely for my own entertainment. So I see nowt wrong with it - although it would be nice to know if they are on anywhere else.

Just in case you don't read the post above this one, then this is the only place I post these rankings.

Also, why don't you post your divisional/P4P rankings that used to be stickied at the top of the British forum anymore?

The rankings do no harm, do provide some talking points and Horse does argue its points quite validly and aren't an absolute joke. So I encourage Horse to continue them.

Thankyou.