BoxRec Forum HW Top 15 ranking - Hunter vs Wilson

[Ruthless-RKO]

At least Hunter has fought.

TBH, I’m surprised Parker wasn’t moved above him when he beat Chisora at least. But that’s down to us.

Hunter is fighting and probably done that bit more than the guys under him in the last year.

[margaret thatcher]

who should be ranked higher right now, michael hunter or joe parker? that's basically the question when it comes to him getting bumped down, the other guys below that arent really important, as pretty much no one is voting to demote hunter any further than just 1 spot

a number of ppl have been bringing up that hunter is ranked too high btw.....the whole 'we voted him there' thingy, it doesnt mean everyone did

[candyslim]

Duplicate

[candyslim]

@Ironbeard: Wow. I sure trod on your toes didn't I? Unintended i assure you, I actuality missed the suggestion to drop Hunter until Maggie mentioned it.

I accept my vote is based on perception, what else since we can't read minds, but there is no politics involved. I don't actually know what you mean by that and I don't even want to speculate. Suffice to say I'm not a Kiwi, I'm not a Croat, I'm not anti-American, and I have no bias regarding skin-colour.

Maybe the time to rate Parker over Hunter was after Parker's last fight as you say, but Parker didn't look that great and Hunter was higher in my estimation back then, when he appeared to be a fighter who would take on anybody. I already conceded that my disappointment in Hunter might be unfair to him. Beyond that admission which you wouldn't get from everybody, I don't know what else I can tell you.

[Cyclops]

It's only a poll by a bunch of nerds on a boxing forum.

It's not the actual world rankings. Nobody really cares. Michael Hunter isn't reading this crying. It's just a bit of fun.

[ironbeard]

@Ironbeard: Wow. I sure trod on your toes didn't I? Unintended i assure you, I actuality missed the suggestion to drop Hunter until Maggie mentioned it.

I accept my vote is based on perception, what else since we can't read minds, but there is no politics involved. I don't actually know what you mean by that and I don't even want to speculate. Suffice to say I'm not a Kiwi, I'm not a Croat, I'm not anti-American, and I have no bias regarding skin-colour.

Maybe the time to rate Parker over Hunter was after Parker's last fight as you say, but Parker didn't look that great and Hunter was higher in my estimation back then, when he appeared to be a fighter who would take on anybody. I already conceded that my disappointment in Hunter might be unfair to him. Beyond that admission which you wouldn't get from everybody, I don't know what else I can tell you.

I did not suggest anyone’s vote be disregarded, until it was suggested that mine should be. Your rationalization that Hunter should be moved down because he did not fight who you preferred him to fight, not based on his performance against who he did fight, not based on any improvement on the part of Parker, can only be regarded as political bias since it is not based on the actual performances of the boxers.

But, that is fine, and so is my rationale for moving Hunter to 5.

I have worn steel toed boots for over 40 years, btw.

[ironbeard]

It's only a poll by a bunch of nerds on a boxing forum.

It's not the actual world rankings. Nobody really cares. Michael Hunter isn't reading this crying. It's just a bit of fun.

True.

Siddown, shaddap, and let us have our fun, cyclopean.

[Finkel]

pretty sure oscar rivas got voted down didnt he

i see absolutely 0 problem with it.,.guys shouldnt get some sort of immunity for beating nobodies

the way the rankings work is that sometimes guys drift too high, and it's tough to change the situation until they actually fight and we can vote on them. he may not fight for another year at his rate, this is the chance people get to place him where they think he should be

moving him down 1 spot is hardly unreasonable

It's not unreasonable, and Oogibie obviously feels the same way considering he tried to vote Parker down 1 spot after he beat Chisora...

[Finkel]

Based on the ludicrous votes on this thread…

Hunter to 5.

I'll change mine to 5 just to try and balance those dropping a guy after a win, no matter how one-sided.

Try not to be a hypocrite, and just say it like it is, you are throwing your toys out the pram because a fighter you like is being voted down.

You had no issue voting both Parker down a spot following his win against Chisora

Ruiz to 7
Parker to 10

Chisora no change.

[oogiebe]

pretty sure oscar rivas got voted down didnt he

i see absolutely 0 problem with it.,.guys shouldnt get some sort of immunity for beating nobodies

the way the rankings work is that sometimes guys drift too high, and it's tough to change the situation until they actually fight and we can vote on them. he may not fight for another year at his rate, this is the chance people get to place him where they think he should be

moving him down 1 spot is hardly unreasonable

It's not unreasonable, and Oogibie obviously feels the same way considering he tried to vote Parker down 1 spot after he beat Chisora...

I don't remember that, but I'll take your word for it. Diff is Parker struggled with Chis.

[oogiebe]

Based on the ludicrous votes on this thread…

Hunter to 5.

I'll change mine to 5 just to try and balance those dropping a guy after a win, no matter how one-sided.

Try not to be a hypocrite, and just say it like it is, you are throwing your toys out the pram because a fighter you like is being voted down.

You had no issue voting both Parker down a spot following his win against Chisora

Ruiz to 7
Parker to 10

Chisora no change.

LOL! Nice saying! As I posted prior, I'm not fond of Hunter.
Parker struggled with Chis
Hunter demolished an admittedly lesser opponent in Wilson.
Fury didn't as well as we all thought he would vs Wallin, but no one dropped him.

Just saying.

[Ruthless-RKO]

pretty sure oscar rivas got voted down didnt he

i see absolutely 0 problem with it.,.guys shouldnt get some sort of immunity for beating nobodies

the way the rankings work is that sometimes guys drift too high, and it's tough to change the situation until they actually fight and we can vote on them. he may not fight for another year at his rate, this is the chance people get to place him where they think he should be

moving him down 1 spot is hardly unreasonable

It's not unreasonable, and Oogibie obviously feels the same way considering he tried to vote Parker down 1 spot after he beat Chisora...

Plus, Rivas is at BW now…

[Finkel]

At least Hunter has fought.

TBH, I’m surprised Parker wasn’t moved above him when he beat Chisora at least. But that’s down to us.

Hunter is fighting and probably done that bit more than the guys under him in the last year.

I had a look at the thread from 2 months ago, and it was as you would expect. People didn't want to move Parker up for various reasons including not beating Chisora as convincingly as Pulev (who was ranked lower than Parker). Some voted him up, some even voted him down.

But one issue you will have with this voting set-up is if fighter 8 might get a win that justifies him being above fighter 6, but not one that justifies being above fighter 7. So there will be no change. Fighter 6 keeps position due to the strength of fighter 7s recent wins.

Personally I am happy for this to be melting pot of opinions, if Hunter moves down he moved down, if there is no change there is no change, if hunter moves up, I will grin and bear it.

[oogiebe]

At least Hunter has fought.

TBH, I’m surprised Parker wasn’t moved above him when he beat Chisora at least. But that’s down to us.

Hunter is fighting and probably done that bit more than the guys under him in the last year.

I had a look at the thread from 2 months ago, and it was as you would expect. People didn't want to move Parker up for various reasons including not beating Chisora as convincingly as Pulev (who was ranked lower than Parker). Some voted him up, some even voted him down.

But one issue you will have with this voting set-up is if fighter 8 might get a win that justifies him being above fighter 6, but not one that justifies being above fighter 7. So there will be no change. Fighter 6 keeps position due to the strength of fighter 7s recent wins.

Personally I am happy for this to be melting pot of opinions, if Hunter moves down he moved down, if there is no change there is no change, if hunter moves up, I will grin and bear it.

My takeaway is that I'd love to see Hunter vs Parker.

[margaret thatcher]

pretty sure oscar rivas got voted down didnt he

i see absolutely 0 problem with it.,.guys shouldnt get some sort of immunity for beating nobodies

the way the rankings work is that sometimes guys drift too high, and it's tough to change the situation until they actually fight and we can vote on them. he may not fight for another year at his rate, this is the chance people get to place him where they think he should be

moving him down 1 spot is hardly unreasonable

It's not unreasonable, and Oogibie obviously feels the same way considering he tried to vote Parker down 1 spot after he beat Chisora...

and our boy oogs moved pov down 4 places after beating hughie, and moved pulev down after beating dinu.....

but now is a 'he won so he stays put' warrior

[oogiebe]

pretty sure oscar rivas got voted down didnt he

i see absolutely 0 problem with it.,.guys shouldnt get some sort of immunity for beating nobodies

the way the rankings work is that sometimes guys drift too high, and it's tough to change the situation until they actually fight and we can vote on them. he may not fight for another year at his rate, this is the chance people get to place him where they think he should be

moving him down 1 spot is hardly unreasonable

It's not unreasonable, and Oogibie obviously feels the same way considering he tried to vote Parker down 1 spot after he beat Chisora...

and our boy oogs moved pov down 4 places after beating hughie, and moved pulev down after beating dinu.....

but now is a 'he won so he stays put' warrior

All true.
EDIT: But stays at 8 not 5. Can't put him ahead of Joyce.

[Finkel]

At least Hunter has fought.

TBH, I’m surprised Parker wasn’t moved above him when he beat Chisora at least. But that’s down to us.

Hunter is fighting and probably done that bit more than the guys under him in the last year.

I had a look at the thread from 2 months ago, and it was as you would expect. People didn't want to move Parker up for various reasons including not beating Chisora as convincingly as Pulev (who was ranked lower than Parker). Some voted him up, some even voted him down.

But one issue you will have with this voting set-up is if fighter 8 might get a win that justifies him being above fighter 6, but not one that justifies being above fighter 7. So there will be no change. Fighter 6 keeps position due to the strength of fighter 7s recent wins.

Personally I am happy for this to be melting pot of opinions, if Hunter moves down he moved down, if there is no change there is no change, if hunter moves up, I will grin and bear it.

My takeaway is that I'd love to see Hunter vs Parker.

Me too, would be a great fight.

But right now, I'd take just seeing Hunter actually get his first career Win against someone in the top 30.

[Cyclops]

It's only a poll by a bunch of nerds on a boxing forum.

It's not the actual world rankings. Nobody really cares. Michael Hunter isn't reading this crying. It's just a bit of fun.

True.

Siddown, shaddap, and let us have our fun, cyclopean.

Still slightly passive aggressive, but you guys fight amongst yourselves. It's just a forum, and Parker has achieved more on paper than Hunter... If Hunter had fought somebody worth a grain of salt in the past few years I would have voted no change. He hasn't. Parker fought Chisora and got (in my opinion) a dodgy win, so he's got a better record than Hunter and a better recent win.

We can only vote on people in this little, insignificant thread, by their most recent results. Hunter hasn't fought anybody who's anybody in 2 years. Personally, I had Chisora beating Parker, so I think Chisora should be higher, but this particular poll doesn't work like that. Whyte got KO'd by a shot Povetkin, but avenged it. I don't think I voted there, but I thought Chisora won the first Whyte fight (and had money on Del on points) but got stopped in the rematch (for which I was in the crowd) and I think Whyte and Chisora are basically on the same level really. Whyte's high ranking doesn't reflect where I think he is in the division: if he fights a nobody next I might vote to demote him too. What has he done in the past few years but get KO'd by a shot old fighter and then KO the same fighter who was soooo shot he could barely walk to the ring let alone fight? Trust me unless he fights somebody of worth he gets dropped too.

If AJ beats Usyk, then he goes to number one in this thread no matter how much I think of Fury. If Usyk beats AJ, he goes to number 2.

Fury has been inactive and raped Wilder last time out. I think AJ-Wilder would be a great fight, but Fury is going to kill Wilder in October. AJ-Usyk decides the next promotion/demotion.

[KiwiRider]

My takeaway is that I'd love to see Hunter vs Parker.

Oh!
Yes please

[ironbeard]

My takeaway is that I'd love to see Hunter vs Parker.

Oh!
Yes please

X2

[candyslim]

@Ironbeard: Wow. I sure trod on your toes didn't I? Unintended i assure you, I actuality missed the suggestion to drop Hunter until Maggie mentioned it.

I accept my vote is based on perception, what else since we can't read minds, but there is no politics involved. I don't actually know what you mean by that and I don't even want to speculate. Suffice to say I'm not a Kiwi, I'm not a Croat, I'm not anti-American, and I have no bias regarding skin-colour.

Maybe the time to rate Parker over Hunter was after Parker's last fight as you say, but Parker didn't look that great and Hunter was higher in my estimation back then, when he appeared to be a fighter who would take on anybody. I already conceded that my disappointment in Hunter might be unfair to him. Beyond that admission which you wouldn't get from everybody, I don't know what else I can tell you.

I did not suggest anyone’s vote be disregarded, until it was suggested that mine should be. Your rationalization that Hunter should be moved down because he did not fight who you preferred him to fight, not based on his performance against who he did fight, not based on any improvement on the part of Parker, can only be regarded as political bias since it is not based on the actual performances of the boxers.

But, that is fine, and so is my rationale for moving Hunter to 5.

I have worn steel toed boots for over 40 years, btw.

My posts may occasionally be misguided but they are never politically motivated, at least not consciously. We all have our bias's, mine tend to favour fighters who accept tough challenges. Yes I wanted to see Hunter v Hrgovic, it would have been an excellent fight, but it wasn't a whim. This was a fight sanctioned by the IBF for their position as mandatory challenger.

Hunter was absolutely within his rights to decline the fight and anybody is free to form an opinion about that and express it on a boxing forum. Like a mathematician I think it's good to show how you arrive at your answer.

If you are kindly and/or well disposed toward Hunter you will think he was absolutely right to reject a fight against Hrgovic for that kind of money ... 375k?

If not you may feel he had an opportunity to earn a guaranteed shot at Joshua or whomever holds his IBF title and he ducked it. I can see both sides and I'm conflicted, but I lean more toward the former.

Does he deserve to be dropped a place? I think so. Does he deserve to be dropped from the rankings altogether? No way. I would advocate disregarding that vote. Is it more absurd than moving Hunter up three places on the strength of beating up Mike Wilson? Probably not and you're too smart to think otherwise, so I conclude that if yours is not a protest vote, then you believe Hunter deserves to be rated at 5 based on his overall career so far?

Well that's a matter of opinion and you are entitled to yours. I have found over time yours is an opinion I can respect even if I don't always agree.

[ironbeard]

@Ironbeard: Wow. I sure trod on your toes didn't I? Unintended i assure you, I actuality missed the suggestion to drop Hunter until Maggie mentioned it.

I accept my vote is based on perception, what else since we can't read minds, but there is no politics involved. I don't actually know what you mean by that and I don't even want to speculate. Suffice to say I'm not a Kiwi, I'm not a Croat, I'm not anti-American, and I have no bias regarding skin-colour.

Maybe the time to rate Parker over Hunter was after Parker's last fight as you say, but Parker didn't look that great and Hunter was higher in my estimation back then, when he appeared to be a fighter who would take on anybody. I already conceded that my disappointment in Hunter might be unfair to him. Beyond that admission which you wouldn't get from everybody, I don't know what else I can tell you.

I did not suggest anyone’s vote be disregarded, until it was suggested that mine should be. Your rationalization that Hunter should be moved down because he did not fight who you preferred him to fight, not based on his performance against who he did fight, not based on any improvement on the part of Parker, can only be regarded as political bias since it is not based on the actual performances of the boxers.

But, that is fine, and so is my rationale for moving Hunter to 5.

I have worn steel toed boots for over 40 years, btw.

My posts may occasionally be misguided but they are never politically motivated, at least not consciously. We all have our bias's, mine tend to favour fighters who accept tough challenges. Yes I wanted to see Hunter v Hrgovic, it would have been an excellent fight, but it wasn't a whim. This was a fight sanctioned by the IBF for their position as mandatory challenger.

Hunter was absolutely within his rights to decline the fight and anybody is free to form an opinion about that and express it on a boxing forum. Like a mathematician I think it's good to show how you arrive at your answer.

If you are kindly and/or well disposed toward Hunter you will think he was absolutely right to reject a fight against Hrgovic for that kind of money ... 375k?

If not you may feel he had an opportunity to earn a guaranteed shot at Joshua or whomever holds his IBF title and he ducked it. I can see both sides and I'm conflicted, but I lean more toward the former.

Does he deserve to be dropped a place? I think so. Does he deserve to be dropped from the rankings altogether? No way. I would advocate disregarding that vote. Is it more absurd than moving Hunter up three places on the strength of beating up Mike Wilson? Probably not and you're too smart to think otherwise, so I conclude that if yours is not a protest vote, then you believe Hunter deserves to be rated at 5 based on his overall career so far?

Well that's a matter of opinion and you are entitled to yours. I have found over time yours is an opinion I can respect even if I don't always agree.

I have no idea what the details are that lead to the Hrgovic v Hunter fight not happening. I doubt that you know them either (mathematics, business, personal, timing, or otherwise).

What we do know is that Hunter won his last fight, and Parker has not fought since he slipped by Chisora, at which time he was not voted to move ahead of Hunter. What we do know is that a number of individuals are taking this opportunity to move Parker ahead of Hunter based on who Hunter did NOT fight outside the top 15, not based on any improvement on Parker’s part, nor degradation on Hunter’s part.

I like both boxers. I would have had no problem with Parker moving ahead of Hunter based on his performance v Chisora. I do have a problem with Hunter being dropped below Parker based on who he did not fight rather than how he fought.

If we are going to start doing that, then the entire list should be open to reevaluation post every result involving any boxer on the list. Nobody else has fought Hrgovic since Parker squeaked by Chisora. Why not move Hrgovic to #1?

[Onetimeonly]

I don't know everything, but triller dumping cash and dazn having to pull it back in speaks to my business sense. Not like Hunter is a name

[candyslim]

I did not suggest anyone’s vote be disregarded, until it was suggested that mine should be. Your rationalization that Hunter should be moved down because he did not fight who you preferred him to fight, not based on his performance against who he did fight, not based on any improvement on the part of Parker, can only be regarded as political bias since it is not based on the actual performances of the boxers.

But, that is fine, and so is my rationale for moving Hunter to 5.

I have worn steel toed boots for over 40 years, btw.

My posts may occasionally be misguided but they are never politically motivated, at least not consciously. We all have our bias's, mine tend to favour fighters who accept tough challenges. Yes I wanted to see Hunter v Hrgovic, it would have been an excellent fight, but it wasn't a whim. This was a fight sanctioned by the IBF for their position as mandatory challenger.

Hunter was absolutely within his rights to decline the fight and anybody is free to form an opinion about that and express it on a boxing forum. Like a mathematician I think it's good to show how you arrive at your answer.

If you are kindly and/or well disposed toward Hunter you will think he was absolutely right to reject a fight against Hrgovic for that kind of money ... 375k?

If not you may feel he had an opportunity to earn a guaranteed shot at Joshua or whomever holds his IBF title and he ducked it. I can see both sides and I'm conflicted, but I lean more toward the former.

Does he deserve to be dropped a place? I think so. Does he deserve to be dropped from the rankings altogether? No way. I would advocate disregarding that vote. Is it more absurd than moving Hunter up three places on the strength of beating up Mike Wilson? Probably not and you're too smart to think otherwise, so I conclude that if yours is not a protest vote, then you believe Hunter deserves to be rated at 5 based on his overall career so far?

Well that's a matter of opinion and you are entitled to yours. I have found over time yours is an opinion I can respect even if I don't always agree.

I have no idea what the details are that lead to the Hrgovic v Hunter fight not happening. I doubt that you know them either (mathematics, business, personal, timing, or otherwise).

What we do know is that Hunter won his last fight, and Parker has not fought since he slipped by Chisora, at which time he was not voted to move ahead of Hunter. What we do know is that a number of individuals are taking this opportunity to move Parker ahead of Hunter based on who Hunter did NOT fight outside the top 15, not based on any improvement on Parker’s part, nor degradation on Hunter’s part.

I like both boxers. I would have had no problem with Parker moving ahead of Hunter based on his performance v Chisora. I do have a problem with Hunter being dropped below Parker based on who he did not fight rather than how he fought.

If we are going to start doing that, then the entire list should be open to reevaluation post every result involving any boxer on the list. Nobody else has fought Hrgovic since Parker squeaked by Chisora. Why not move Hrgovic to #1?

Well I do advocate making him IBF mandatory by default so that would at least make him the IBF #1.

[ironbeard]