Admittedly biased towards him as I like him as a fighter, on second thought I would have had Andrade ahead of him and possibly Trout, but I can't think of 5 on top of that. Jermell, Martirosyan, Bundradge? Hardly a stacked division.Horse wrote:No way is Smith No. 3.ElJefe wrote:Light Middleweight:
1. Lara
2. Charlo
3. Smith
He's a complete joke of a champion.
He doesn't even deserve a top 10 spot.
UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
It's a weak division, but Smith still doesn't deserve to be anywhere near the top.ElJefe wrote:Admittedly biased towards him as I like him as a fighter, on second thought I would have had Andrade ahead of him and possibly Trout, but I can't think of 5 on top of that. Jermell, Martirosyan, Bundradge? Hardly a stacked division.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
I don't think anyone in the division has a very good resume though, so I end up leaning towards ranking it on who I think is better. I think Smith beats Jermell, Martirosyan etc and I can't even think of any more 154lbers to be honest, it's a shallow division.Horse wrote:It's a weak division, but Smith still doesn't deserve to be anywhere near the top.ElJefe wrote:Admittedly biased towards him as I like him as a fighter, on second thought I would have had Andrade ahead of him and possibly Trout, but I can't think of 5 on top of that. Jermell, Martirosyan, Bundradge? Hardly a stacked division.
-
forcefraser
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 5462
- Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 06:15
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Come on boys, Fast Car told us that Crolla was "Nammmma wan lightweight in de wooowd" Surely he´s not telling us porkies?
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
I have Smith 9th at 154
Head to head I'd take Lara, both Charlos, Trout, Andrade, Vanes, and probably Williams over him. Soro would be 50/50 ish.
Head to head I'd take Lara, both Charlos, Trout, Andrade, Vanes, and probably Williams over him. Soro would be 50/50 ish.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
I thought Soro was at middleweight these days? I'll admit I haven't seen anything of Williams.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Wasn't he going to fight Smith for the vacant title before promotional issues got in the way? He would've been Liam's best opponent by far, so it's a shame it ended up being Smith-Thompson.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
I remember it being mentioned but I thought he chose to stay at 160 when it didn't happen. Just checked and his last fight was for the EBU at middleweight but that was over a year ago, not sure what he's up to now. Soro vs Smith for the vacant title would have been a much better fight than Thompson.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Less than stellar clients and mediocre talent?Tarkus wrote:Fury is the only number one, but his status is very shaky. He has not yet won the rematch. He has not yet have a defense. He has not yet defeated other top men in the division. Apart from Klitschko win Furys CV is pretty weak.
DeGale is close but I cant call him number one. He could have lead the division by now but where are the unification fights? Now young guns are coming up and his status is getting even less assured.
I think having 13 belt holders and 1 (weak) champion means that UK has mediocre talent but fighters have been able to maximize their potential in recent years. Lot of credit must be given to promoters for been able to get title shots for their less then stellar clients. Especially forum favorite Eddie, 8 out of 13 are his men.
Like Olympic gold medalists Joshua and Degale?
Or pros who learned the trade in the hard 12 round fights like McDonnell and Crolla to win fierce fights vs international opposition?
Some fighters like Burns and Bellew have benefited fighting for titles when the champion is unable to defend. Their promoter is pretty sharp and able to sneak them in. But others like Fury, McDonnell (in two consecutive fights) and Brook beat champions - away from home to boot.
A number of big fights are in the making, such as Brook v Vargas, Fury v Klitschko 2, Crolla v Linares, Degale v Jack...Fights such as these can take us closer to the answers.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
If that happened maybe you'd have an argument, but it hasn't and won't so you don't. Also Fury has shown he can win at a level none of his rivals have, Wilder and Povetkin have a good number of wins, but against tier 2 opposition, (Povetkin also has a loss) Pulev has one win of note since losing to Wlad, and generally not as strong wins, Ortiz has two wins worth talking about, Parker has one, Joshua has none, and Breazeale is terrible.Wales wrote:If you beat the man you are the man. In that sense he's #1.
However, Wlad had become the man by unifying and beating all comers over a 10 year period. Wlad had hit 40 and He'd only fought once in 23 months, an uninspiring points win over Bryant Jennings who'd got the fight after a SD win over Mike Perez ffs.
Like I said, on paper Fury is #1, but I'm not sure he's the best.
Also using the "to be the man beat the man" theory, what happens if Fury beats Wlad then 3 low level guys for argument sake Chisora Whyte and Adamek but Joshua goes on a 5 fight KO winning streak beating Brazeale Parker Wilder Povetkin Ortiz ? Is fury still #1?
Last edited by BitPlayer on 01 Jun 2016, 18:00, edited 1 time in total.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Weak as in third best in the division? Because h was No.3 on Boxrec whose rankings are literally a measure of how strong your CV is.Tarkus wrote:Fury is the only number one, but his status is very shaky. He has not yet won the rematch. He has not yet have a defense. He has not yet defeated other top men in the division. Apart from Klitschko win Furys CV is pretty weak.
DeGale is close but I cant call him number one. He could have lead the division by now but where are the unification fights? Now young guns are coming up and his status is getting even less assured.
I think having 13 belt holders and 1 (weak) champion means that UK has mediocre talent but fighters have been able to maximize their potential in recent years. Lot of credit must be given to promoters for been able to get title shots for their less then stellar clients. Especially forum favorite Eddie, 8 out of 13 are his men.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
So? All top heavy weights avoid each other not just Fury, they all have weak CVs, well except of Povetkin perhaps. However they all are either contenders or paper champs. Wheres Fury is the real champ. And for the real champ his resume is very weak.BitPlayer wrote:Weak as in third best in the division? Because h was No.3 on Boxrec whose rankings are literally a measure of how strong your CV is.Tarkus wrote:Fury is the only number one, but his status is very shaky. He has not yet won the rematch. He has not yet have a defense. He has not yet defeated other top men in the division. Apart from Klitschko win Furys CV is pretty weak.
DeGale is close but I cant call him number one. He could have lead the division by now but where are the unification fights? Now young guns are coming up and his status is getting even less assured.
I think having 13 belt holders and 1 (weak) champion means that UK has mediocre talent but fighters have been able to maximize their potential in recent years. Lot of credit must be given to promoters for been able to get title shots for their less then stellar clients. Especially forum favorite Eddie, 8 out of 13 are his men.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Brook, Frampton, DeGale, Fury, Joshua, Selby are all talented. Plus few fighters which dont have titles. They all have chance to become number one. The most of the rest are just belt holders that have already maxed out. Overall I think this is a strong generation of UK boxers.Autobarn wrote:Less than stellar clients and mediocre talent?Tarkus wrote:Fury is the only number one, but his status is very shaky. He has not yet won the rematch. He has not yet have a defense. He has not yet defeated other top men in the division. Apart from Klitschko win Furys CV is pretty weak.
DeGale is close but I cant call him number one. He could have lead the division by now but where are the unification fights? Now young guns are coming up and his status is getting even less assured.
I think having 13 belt holders and 1 (weak) champion means that UK has mediocre talent but fighters have been able to maximize their potential in recent years. Lot of credit must be given to promoters for been able to get title shots for their less then stellar clients. Especially forum favorite Eddie, 8 out of 13 are his men.
Like Olympic gold medalists Joshua and Degale?
Or pros who learned the trade in the hard 12 round fights like McDonnell and Crolla to win fierce fights vs international opposition?
Some fighters like Burns and Bellew have benefited fighting for titles when the champion is unable to defend. Their promoter is pretty sharp and able to sneak them in. But others like Fury, McDonnell (in two consecutive fights) and Brook beat champions - away from home to boot.
A number of big fights are in the making, such as Brook v Vargas, Fury v Klitschko 2, Crolla v Linares, Degale v Jack...Fights such as these can take us closer to the answers.
-
PredatorHayds
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 4891
- Joined: 08 Jul 2015, 08:23
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Soro had promoter problems which have finally been resolved.
He was due to fight at light-middle but got injured. He'd be one id say is top 10 light middle if he chooses to stay in the division.
He was due to fight at light-middle but got injured. He'd be one id say is top 10 light middle if he chooses to stay in the division.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
I think the point with Fury is that he's undoubtedly number 1, but almost certainly not the best. Maybe not even in the top 5. Sooner or later, if he doesn't retire, he'll have to fight Ortiz, or AJ, or Wilder or even Pulev, and at that point, a lot of people think he'll be exposed. None of this stops him being the number 1.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
fury and degale are real champions of there weight no doubt.good post as some one who moans about titles shut me up
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Terrible post.SamWise72 wrote:I think the point with Fury is that he's undoubtedly number 1, but almost certainly not the best. Maybe not even in the top 5. Sooner or later, if he doesn't retire, he'll have to fight Ortiz, or AJ, or Wilder or even Pulev, and at that point, a lot of people think he'll be exposed. None of this stops him being the number 1.
-
Manchester Massive
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 371
- Joined: 29 May 2008, 18:34
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
How do you think Pulev or Wilder would fare if they were fighting Wlad next?SamWise72 wrote:I think the point with Fury is that he's undoubtedly number 1, but almost certainly not the best. Maybe not even in the top 5. Sooner or later, if he doesn't retire, he'll have to fight Ortiz, or AJ, or Wilder or even Pulev, and at that point, a lot of people think he'll be exposed. None of this stops him being the number 1.
-
ClivePatrickLyons
- Middleweight
- Posts: 2811
- Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 22:10
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Wales wrote:UK now has 13 world champions. But how many fighters do we have who are truly #1 in their division though?
Can make a case for De Gale at SMW.
Fury on paper at HW cos he beat the man, but I don't think he's #1, really?
Is that it? 1 maybe 2 from 13
I bet some of them 13 are WBA Champs you know the WBA how they have 3 Champion's in every weight class the REAL Champ IS THE ONE WITH THE WORD SUPER in it The only one of your 13 World
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Didn't mean it to be negative mate. Great thing about having UK fighters holding "world titles" (whether they're #1 or not) is it increases the chances of big fights, even unification fights.simple example Would Lebedev Makabu (had he won) even get UK coverage? Probably not. Lebedev Bellew however...danamba7 wrote:I swear we are the only nation to be able to somehow turn such a positive into a bit of a negative. Fury may be the only proven number 1 but AJ, Degale, Brook, McDonnell, Frampton Crolla/Flanagan could prove to be. Ideally there wouldn't be this many belts of course but let's enjoy this success.
-
tigermoth87
- Welterweight
- Posts: 1799
- Joined: 21 Feb 2016, 11:23
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
Fury and Degale
I'd fancy Flanagan, Crolla and McDonnell to be in with a chance against the other champs in their divisions too but can't flat out say they are the best until they face them.
I'd fancy Flanagan, Crolla and McDonnell to be in with a chance against the other champs in their divisions too but can't flat out say they are the best until they face them.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
A specialist boxing forum and two pages later no one has noticed or picked up on this totally inaccuracy?Wales wrote:
However, Wlad had become the man by unifying and beating all comers over a 10 year period. Wlad had hit 40 and He'd only fought once in 23 months, an uninspiring points win over Bryant Jennings who'd got the fight after a SD win over Mike Perez ffs.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
He's not wrong Horse. There's at least 5 dudes at Heavyweight that could kick his ass.Horse wrote:Wales wrote:Fury on paper at HW cos he beat the man, but I don't think he's #1, really?
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
For what it's worth. Carl Frampton with his win over Scott Quigg already this year, and the Leo Santa Cruz fight coming up soon. If he beats Santa Cruz I think he'd be the frontrunner for Fighter of the Year this year.
Re: UK has 13 world champions but how many are #1?
I might have to quit this forum.gilgamesh wrote:He's not wrong Horse. There's at least 5 dudes at Heavyweight that could kick his ass.
What a rotten post.