Pound for pound British rankings

Pugilist-specialist · Post by **Pugilist-specialist** » 06 Dec 2013, 18:07

Off the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/boxing/17691531

keithmoonhangover · Post by **keithmoonhangover** » 06 Dec 2013, 18:15

Pugilist-specialist wrote:Off the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/boxing/17691531

George fought a hell of a fight against Froch, but bearing in mind he lost, I think he's too high in the list. How the hell they can have Barker bellow is madness.

ajwesty13 · Post by **ajwesty13** » 06 Dec 2013, 18:17

why is frampton above Quigg ... however it happened Quigg holds the IBF belt

sgtcecil · Post by **sgtcecil** » 06 Dec 2013, 18:22

ajwesty13 wrote:why is frampton above Quigg ... however it happened Quigg holds the IBF belt

Quigg has the joke WBA belt - Rigo is the real WBA champ! Also for me frampton is better and a KO of kiko > anything quigg has achieved

mickey1975 · Post by **mickey1975** » 06 Dec 2013, 18:23

ajwesty13 wrote:why is frampton above Quigg ... however it happened Quigg holds the IBF belt

Probably the win over Kiko, who is a belt holder and far more proven than the two guys Quigg fought in his 'World' Title fights.

keirw · Post by **keirw** » 06 Dec 2013, 18:31

if it is based on recent results then barker should be above murray and groves.
I agree that frampton's victory over martinez is enough see him ranked above quigg, that may change next year if they manage to get them two in the same ring

ajwesty13 · Post by **ajwesty13** » 06 Dec 2013, 18:31

Then i can understand why quigg is above him then... how come there is 2 bloody world WBA belts then ?? I dont understand is it interim or something? crazy

keirw · Post by **keirw** » 06 Dec 2013, 19:02

ajwesty13 wrote:Then i can understand why quigg is above him then... how come there is 2 bloody world WBA belts then ?? I dont understand is it interim or something? crazy

if somebody holds the wba belt as well as another world strap then the wba upgrades that belt to 'super' status and comission a new 'regular' strap that they the bestow onto the interim champ.
it is needlessly complicated at the best of times but sometimes it gets beyond a joke, just look at the super-middleweight division.

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 06 Dec 2013, 19:45

2. Kell Brook

Awful list.

daviddee · Post by **daviddee** » 06 Dec 2013, 19:49

I think this list is pretty Decent. I'm not a brook fan by a long way but he is undefeated

keithmoonhangover · Post by **keithmoonhangover** » 06 Dec 2013, 19:52

Horse wrote:
2. Kell Brook
Awful list.

You moved Groves up on your list for losing a fight.

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:03

keithmoonhangover wrote:You moved Groves up on your list for losing a fight.

So what?

keithmoonhangover · Post by **keithmoonhangover** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:05

Horse wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:You moved Groves up on your list for losing a fight.
So what?

Fighters move up rankings because they win, not when they lose. Otherwise journeymen would rule the world.

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:09

keithmoonhangover wrote:Fighters move up rankings because they win, not when they lose. Otherwise journeymen would rule the world.

Groves was robbed.

keithmoonhangover · Post by **keithmoonhangover** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:10

Horse wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:Fighters move up rankings because they win, not when they lose. Otherwise journeymen would rule the world.
Groves was robbed.

Do you want your ratings to be unbiased Horse? Do you want them to be credible?

daviddee · Post by **daviddee** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:14

After the Groves fight I would be having Groves as the number 1 p4p boxer so how is his rankings not credible. Groves is the best boxer in the uk.. P4P means that. I guarantee in 15 years no one remembers Froch and Groves and Degale will surpass his legacy as he calls it

keithmoonhangover · Post by **keithmoonhangover** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:15

daviddee wrote:After the Groves fight I would be having Groves as the number 1 p4p boxer so how is his rankings not credible. Groves is the best boxer in the uk.. P4P means that. I guarantee in 15 years no one remembers Froch and Groves and Degale will surpass his legacy as he calls it

Are you drinking mate? Like it or not, Groves lost.

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:20

keithmoonhangover wrote:Are you drinking mate? Like it or not, Groves lost.

Groves was cheated, not defeated.

daviddee · Post by **daviddee** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:20

keithmoonhangover wrote:
daviddee wrote:After the Groves fight I would be having Groves as the number 1 p4p boxer so how is his rankings not credible. Groves is the best boxer in the uk.. P4P means that. I guarantee in 15 years no one remembers Froch and Groves and Degale will surpass his legacy as he calls it
Are you drinking mate? Like it or not, Groves lost.

Groves was Robbed.. Groves was hated now 90% of the people believe he was robbed!! He SCHOOLED.. The P4P number 1. See most on these forums are blinded by who they support. I don't particularly like either fighter. When the fight was announced I wanted Froch to win(although I thought Groves would).. After the build up I swayed to Groves to win. The fact is he was robbed. Groves has the moral victory and people who are not too far up Froch's rear end know who the real champion is. And deep down Froch knows that too

keithmoonhangover · Post by **keithmoonhangover** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:21

Horse wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:Are you drinking mate? Like it or not, Groves lost.
Groves was cheated, not defeated.

Horse,

Do you want your ratings to be unbiased? Do you want them to be credible?

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:22

keithmoonhangover wrote:Horse,

Do you want your ratings to be unbiased? Do you want them to be credible?

They are unbiased and credible.

keithmoonhangover · Post by **keithmoonhangover** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:24

Horse wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:Horse,

Do you want your ratings to be unbiased? Do you want them to be credible?
They are unbiased and credible.

They are not unbiased or credible if you don't accept the result of a fight.

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:26

keithmoonhangover wrote:They are not unbiased or credible if you don't accept the result of a fight.

I disagree.

keithmoonhangover · Post by **keithmoonhangover** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:29

Horse wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:They are not unbiased or credible if you don't accept the result of a fight.
I disagree.

If they are unbiased, then they are based on actual results, not what ifs. BoxRec's ratings are unbiased, that's why Groves moved down.

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 06 Dec 2013, 20:37

keithmoonhangover wrote:If they are unbiased, then they are based on actual results, not what ifs. BoxRec's ratings are unbiased, that's why Groves moved down.

Rankings should be based on what really happened in a fight.

Pound for pound British rankings

Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings

Re: Pound for pound British rankings