British Top 30 P4P July 2015

[Horse]

OK, why?

Didn't you try to work it out yourself?

It's pretty obvious if you think about it.

[milpool]

OK, why?

Didn't you try to work it out yourself?

It's pretty obvious if you think about it.

You're gonna have to give me a clue.

[Horse]

You're gonna have to give me a clue.

Paul Smith.

[crusader]

Neither. I just want to know why? As an example, I've never read or heard anywhere that Sugar Ray Leonard's victory in the first Hearns fight was lessened by the fact that he was behind on points.

So beating someone easily is not more impressive than struggling to get the win?

I can't be bothered with this.

It's a marathon not a sprint, the winner is the guy with his hand raised at the end. How he does it doesn't matter, he still got the win. Proof of that, is that champions don't lose their titles if they don't win every round.

Champions keeping their titles and runners winning marathons is simply an issue of the final result, but judging the quality of someone's performance--which I imagine that Horse is doing to a sizable extent--should take into account how they generally performed during such an event. I would say that Leonard's performance against Hearns would've been even more impressive and suggested greater ability had he won every round then won by stoppage in a masterclass, just as I'd say that a football team who beats a group of three opponents by one goal each, needing extra time and generous officiating to do so, likely hasn't performed to the same standard as a team who beat the same opponents by five goals each with the officials against them.

The people who already rank AJ #2-5 in the world clearly understand this

[davie]

1. (1.) Carl Froch
2. (2.) Kell Brook
3. (3.) Carl Frampton
4. (4.) Amir Khan
5. (5.) James DeGale
6. (6.) Jamie McDonnell
7. (7.) Tyson Fury
8. (8.) George Groves
9. (9.) Lee Selby
10. (10.) Andy Lee (Irish)

11. (11.) Martin Murray
12. (17.) Lee Haskins
13. (12.) Scott Quigg
14. (13.) Ola Afolabi
15. (14.) Ricky Burns
16. (15.) Tony Bellew
17. (16.) Billy Joe Saunders
18. (19.) Liam Walsh
19. (20.) Dereck Chisora
20. (21.) Stuart Hall

21. (22.) Paul Butler
22. (23.) Chris Eubank Jr
23. (18.) Paul Smith
24. (24.) Kevin Mitchell
25. (RE.) Callum Smith
26. (25.) Frankie Gavin
27. (26.) Derry Mathews
28. (27.) Anthony Crolla
29. (28.) Anthony Joshua
30. (29.) Ovill McKenzie

Out - (30.) Josh Warrington

Absolutely spot on Horse, as always!

[keithmoonhangover]

Champions keeping their titles and runners winning marathons is simply an issue of the final result, but judging the quality of someone's performance--which I imagine that Horse is doing to a sizable extent--should take into account how they generally performed during such an event. I would say that Leonard's performance against Hearns would've been even more impressive and suggested greater ability had he won every round then won by stoppage in a masterclass, just as I'd say that a football team who beats a group of three opponents by one goal each, needing extra time and generous officiating to do so, likely hasn't performed to the same standard as a team who beat the same opponents by five goals each with the officials against them.

The people who already rank AJ #2-5 in the world clearly understand this

I would argue that coming from behind to overcome the odds and win, is more impressive than a fight you dominate.

[los2]

froch dont box anymore.........u cant stand kell being no1..........

So you want Brook to be No. 1 by default?

calzaghe should be ahead of froch..........

[crusader]

Champions keeping their titles and runners winning marathons is simply an issue of the final result, but judging the quality of someone's performance--which I imagine that Horse is doing to a sizable extent--should take into account how they generally performed during such an event. I would say that Leonard's performance against Hearns would've been even more impressive and suggested greater ability had he won every round then won by stoppage in a masterclass, just as I'd say that a football team who beats a group of three opponents by one goal each, needing extra time and generous officiating to do so, likely hasn't performed to the same standard as a team who beat the same opponents by five goals each with the officials against them.

The people who already rank AJ #2-5 in the world clearly understand this

I would argue that coming from behind to overcome the odds and win, is more impressive than a fight you dominate.

I wouldn't. I think someone who shows the ability to avoid that situation in the first place has given the more impressive showing.

Let's say I had to rate two fighters relative to one another and all I had to go on were bouts against the same opponent. One fighter gives a masterclass, win every round by a large margin, then scores a heavy KO; the other fighter gets dropped three times and is down by several points on the cards prior to scoring a come from behind stoppage in the same round the other fighter scored their KO. Given that one easily beat an opponent the other fighter went live and death, I would rank the first fighter above the second. Would you do otherwise? To me that would be unreasonable, as it means to some degree you're penalizing the masterclass performer for not struggling, rather than awarding them for giving a performance that allowed them to avoid the calamities the other guy had.

In either case though, you'd be using the nature of someone's performance to rank them and not simply the fact that they won.

[keithmoonhangover]

Champions keeping their titles and runners winning marathons is simply an issue of the final result, but judging the quality of someone's performance--which I imagine that Horse is doing to a sizable extent--should take into account how they generally performed during such an event. I would say that Leonard's performance against Hearns would've been even more impressive and suggested greater ability had he won every round then won by stoppage in a masterclass, just as I'd say that a football team who beats a group of three opponents by one goal each, needing extra time and generous officiating to do so, likely hasn't performed to the same standard as a team who beat the same opponents by five goals each with the officials against them.

The people who already rank AJ #2-5 in the world clearly understand this

I would argue that coming from behind to overcome the odds and win, is more impressive than a fight you dominate.

I wouldn't. I think someone who shows the ability to avoid that situation in the first place has given the more impressive showing.

Let's say I had to rate two fighters relative to one another and all I had to go on were bouts against the same opponent. One fighter gives a masterclass, win every round by a large margin, then scores a heavy KO; the other fighter gets dropped three times and is down by several points on the cards prior to scoring a come from behind stoppage in the same round the other fighter scored their KO. Given that one easily beat an opponent the other fighter went live and death, I would rank the first fighter above the second. Would you do otherwise? To me that would be unreasonable, as it means to some degree you're penalizing the masterclass performer for not struggling, rather than awarding them for giving a performance that allowed them to avoid the calamities the other guy had.

In either case though, you'd be using the nature of someone's performance to rank them and not simply the fact that they won.

They should only be ranked on three things, victory, defeat or a draw. Performance should be irrelevant when ranking fighters.

[crusader]

I disagree.

[davie]

I honestly don't know why he's on the list. Why is he?

It's been done to death.

Horse,

Please do everyone a favour and start naming your monthly P4P list the "British & Irish Top 30 P4P"
It's on the British and Irish forum, no one will mind the name change and it will stop this recurring argument every month

[freddydoesdallas]

Champions keeping their titles and runners winning marathons is simply an issue of the final result, but judging the quality of someone's performance--which I imagine that Horse is doing to a sizable extent--should take into account how they generally performed during such an event. I would say that Leonard's performance against Hearns would've been even more impressive and suggested greater ability had he won every round then won by stoppage in a masterclass, just as I'd say that a football team who beats a group of three opponents by one goal each, needing extra time and generous officiating to do so, likely hasn't performed to the same standard as a team who beat the same opponents by five goals each with the officials against them.

The people who already rank AJ #2-5 in the world clearly understand this

I would argue that coming from behind to overcome the odds and win, is more impressive than a fight you dominate.

I wouldn't. I think someone who shows the ability to avoid that situation in the first place has given the more impressive showing.

Let's say I had to rate two fighters relative to one another and all I had to go on were bouts against the same opponent. One fighter gives a masterclass, win every round by a large margin, then scores a heavy KO; the other fighter gets dropped three times and is down by several points on the cards prior to scoring a come from behind stoppage in the same round the other fighter scored their KO. Given that one easily beat an opponent the other fighter went live and death, I would rank the first fighter above the second. Would you do otherwise? To me that would be unreasonable, as it means to some degree you're penalizing the masterclass performer for not struggling, rather than awarding them for giving a performance that allowed them to avoid the calamities the other guy had.

In either case though, you'd be using the nature of someone's performance to rank them and not simply the fact that they won.

What about when someone is outboxed for 6 rounds, is winning round 7 clearly and then ko's the opponent later in the round. He was losing the fight at the halfway stage but we have no way of knowing how the latter rounds would have panned out.

Danny Garcia was happy to ship the rounds to Khan as his gameplan was to time Khan and lay him out. Does losing those first 3 rounds make his win less valid?

[Horse]

Absolutely spot on Horse, as always!

[Boxerbeetle]

I honestly don't know why he's on the list. Why is he?

It's been done to death.

Horse,

Please do everyone a favour and start naming your monthly P4P list the "British & Irish Top 30 P4P"
It's on the British and Irish forum, no one will mind the name change and it will stop this recurring argument every month

Yep this would make total sense. If an Irishman is being included every month, why not rename it the British & Irish list. Otherwise what happens if Ireland suddenly produces a batch of top quality boxers soon - can we expect to see the 'British' P4P list including 3 or 4 Irish fighters?

[Horse]

calzaghe should be ahead of froch..........

No, he shouldn't.

[Horse]

I disagree.

As any sane person would.

[Horse]

Horse,

Please do everyone a favour and start naming your monthly P4P list the "British & Irish Top 30 P4P"
It's on the British and Irish forum, no one will mind the name change and it will stop this recurring argument every month

No.

[davie]

Horse,

Please do everyone a favour and start naming your monthly P4P list the "British & Irish Top 30 P4P"
It's on the British and Irish forum, no one will mind the name change and it will stop this recurring argument every month

No.

Also, ditch the abrupt one word responses, it makes you come across as just a bit of a dick.

[Horse]

Also, ditch the abrupt one word responses, it makes you come across as just a bit of a dick.

I don't care.

[davie]

Are you having some sort of breakdown Horse?

[mullenman]

Froch is retired.

no fights in a year your retired

I still hope he comes out of retirement

[Horse]

Are you having some sort of breakdown Horse?

No.

[Horse]

Froch is retired.

no fights in a year your retired

I still hope he comes out of retirement

He's not retired.

[keithmoonhangover]

Froch is retired.

no fights in a year your retired

I still hope he comes out of retirement

He's not retired.

If he doesn't announce his retirement, how long will you keep him in the rankings? Indefinitely?

[Horse]

If he doesn't announce his retirement, how long will you keep him in the rankings? Indefinitely?

Indefinitely.