BoxRec

Happy Slapper wrote:Can't see how Cleverley doesn't even make the top 30, but pretty good.

What's his best win in the last 3 years?

He's a good fighter, but he needs to fight better opposition and beat them when he does.

That was good Saturday night

palooka wrote:If's but's and maybes - Selby won every minute of the bout until it was stopped - very different from the first Froch v Groves contest.

I wasn't impressed.

It was a British stoppage (doctors are getting in on the act now as well) and that takes a lot away from the win. I didn't think Selby was dominating as much as most anyway and he may well have gassed later in the fight.

freddydoesdallas wrote:Poor reasoning. Lee has gone from strength to strength and is considered one of the best at his weight. Selby was ahead on the cards and performing fantastically.

Groves is European level

Lee was behind against Jackson, Korobov & Quillin. Lee has looked very beatable in recent fights and I think Groves is a better fighter.

Groves' world rankings - Ring - 4th, BoxRec - 4th, TBRB - 5th, CHB - 2nd.

Groves is world class.

stevedoc wrote:fair enough .....

palooka wrote: thanks for the explanation.

Horse wrote:

freddydoesdallas wrote:Poor reasoning. Lee has gone from strength to strength and is considered one of the best at his weight. Selby was ahead on the cards and performing fantastically.

Groves is European level

Lee was behind against Jackson, Korobov & Quillin. Lee has looked very beatable in recent fights and I think Groves is a better fighter.

Groves' world rankings - Ring - 4th, BoxRec - 4th, TBRB - 5th, CHB - 2nd.

Groves is world class.

How can he be world class without beating a world class opponent?

He may have been behind but the fact is, he won 2 and drew the other. Doesn't matter if you lose the first five and then win the next 7, you still win. Doesn't matter if you lose 11 and are losing the 12th, if you knock your opponent out you win.

I don't disagree with your ratings in general but i think you have Groves vastly overrated. He was given a shot due to being British not by earning one, got stopped in slightly strange circumstances, got obliterated in a rematch and has now moved from European to world class on that basis?

Horse wrote:

Happy Slapper wrote:Can't see how Cleverley doesn't even make the top 30, but pretty good.

What's his best win in the last 3 years?

He's a good fighter, but he needs to fight better opposition and beat them when he does.

Fair comment, bu he's an ex-World Champion who has not been beaten in his weight division since he lost the belt. Notsaying he should be right up there but Ricky burns is in there, so Clev should be too IMO.

freddydoesdallas wrote:How can he be world class without beating a world class opponent?

Because his record is strong enough to get him a high ranking.

freddydoesdallas wrote:He may have been behind but the fact is, he won 2 and drew the other. Doesn't matter if you lose the first five and then win the next 7, you still win. Doesn't matter if you lose 11 and are losing the 12th, if you knock your opponent out you win.

I don't disagree with your ratings in general but i think you have Groves vastly overrated. He was given a shot due to being British not by earning one, got stopped in slightly strange circumstances, got obliterated in a rematch and has now moved from European to world class on that basis?

Groves was in the top 10 before the Froch fight. He was a legitimate world level contender.

Groves is not vastly overrated at all. How many places lower would you have him?

Happy Slapper wrote:Fair comment, bu he's an ex-World Champion who has not been beaten in his weight division since he lost the belt. Notsaying he should be right up there but Ricky burns is in there, so Clev should be too IMO.

Burns has just done very well against Figueroa.

Cleverly hasn't done anything good in years. He can re-enter if he ever gets another good result.

Horse wrote:

Happy Slapper wrote:Fair comment, bu he's an ex-World Champion who has not been beaten in his weight division since he lost the belt. Notsaying he should be right up there but Ricky burns is in there, so Clev should be too IMO.

Burns has just done very well against Figueroa.

Cleverly hasn't done anything good in years. He can re-enter if he ever gets another good result.

There wasn't that much between Cleverley and Bellew for Tony to be so high and Nathan out altogether, Cleverley wasn't battered by Bellew the way Groves was by Froch.

palooka wrote:There wasn't that much between Cleverley and Bellew for Tony to be so high and Nathan out altogether, Cleverley wasn't battered by Bellew the way Groves was by Froch.

Bellew has done other things in the last three years, Cleverly hasn't.

Cleverly had to go.

palooka wrote:That was good Saturday night

Unfortunately, it wasn't.

Horse wrote:

palooka wrote:If's but's and maybes - Selby won every minute of the bout until it was stopped - very different from the first Froch v Groves contest.

I wasn't impressed.

It was a British stoppage (doctors are getting in on the act now as well) and that takes a lot away from the win. I didn't think Selby was dominating as much as most anyway and he may well have gassed later in the fight.

So you don't think Ward beat Kessler or Pascal beat Dawson?
Technical decision victory is still a victory, it would only be controversial if Selby was either losing or showing signs of gassing, neither of which are the case.

keirw wrote:So you don't think Ward beat Kessler or Pascal beat Dawson?
Technical decision victory is still a victory, it would only be controversial if Selby was either losing or showing signs of gassing, neither of which are the case.

Ward vs Kessler and Pascal vs Dawson both went to the 11th round. Selby vs Gradovich was stopped in the 8th. There were less questions about those wins, although technical decisions are never as good as a proper win.

The fight shouldn't have been stopped. It was a very dodgy stoppage and it should be investigated.

Selby was not doing anywhere near as well in the fight as the commentators were suggesting and Gradovich had a decent chance of turning things around later in the fight, a chance that he wasn't given.

Unconvincing win against a weak world champion.

Horse wrote:

keirw wrote:So you don't think Ward beat Kessler or Pascal beat Dawson?
Technical decision victory is still a victory, it would only be controversial if Selby was either losing or showing signs of gassing, neither of which are the case.

Ward vs Kessler and Pascal vs Dawson both went to the 11th round. Selby vs Gradovich was stopped in the 8th. There were less questions about those wins, although technical decisions are never as good as a proper win.

The fight shouldn't have been stopped. It was a very dodgy stoppage and it should be investigated.

Selby was not doing anywhere near as well in the fight as the commentators were suggesting and Gradovich had a decent chance of turning things around later in the fight, a chance that he wasn't given.

Unconvincing win against a weak world champion.

Bloody 'ell! Talk about putting a negative spin on a good performance!

danamba7 wrote:

Horse wrote:

keirw wrote:So you don't think Ward beat Kessler or Pascal beat Dawson?
Technical decision victory is still a victory, it would only be controversial if Selby was either losing or showing signs of gassing, neither of which are the case.

Ward vs Kessler and Pascal vs Dawson both went to the 11th round. Selby vs Gradovich was stopped in the 8th. There were less questions about those wins, although technical decisions are never as good as a proper win.

The fight shouldn't have been stopped. It was a very dodgy stoppage and it should be investigated.

Selby was not doing anywhere near as well in the fight as the commentators were suggesting and Gradovich had a decent chance of turning things around later in the fight, a chance that he wasn't given.

Unconvincing win against a weak world champion.

Bloody 'ell! Talk about putting a negative spin on a good performance!

He's right, Gradovich could have easily carried on, the cut wasn't that bad and they weren't asking for the doctor for Mitchell later on when he was cut far worse, if it was one of our fighters abroad we'd be fuming if a fight was stopped on a cut like that.

The commentators went way over the top about Selby, the fight was close and the later rounds were always going to suit Gradovich because the fight was being fought at his sort of pace, he could have easily come back and won it, although he would have needed some decent judging for that and from the scores, there hadn't been any until the fight was stopped.

Gradovich was a weak champion. He beat Dib(another weak champion), defended against Munoz, a super bantamweight who was beat up by Stephen Smith a couple of fights later, Dib again, Miskirtchian, who was European level, then drew with Velez, who was completely unproven.

Selby boxed well, but I'm not sure why his performance is being called a masterclass and he's being hailed as a superstar.

Horse wrote:
Unconvincing win against a weak world champion.

When Groves beats that bum Badou, I will remind you of that. Badou isn't even a world champion in anyone's minds. But I'm sure you will state it was a "proper KO and not a technical win" and that it happened on his turf (at which I will state that Badou is actually from Stockholm, Sweden).

But either way, you will find a way to elevate Groves as per usual for no merit.

Each month you give Groves a lofty position above current and former world champions, when the guy has basically done eff all close to what the others have done.

Usually I pass criticism on the fact, but it would seem a fair few other posters have cottoned on now too.

expe wrote:

danamba7 wrote:Bloody 'ell! Talk about putting a negative spin on a good performance!

He's right, Gradovich could have easily carried on, the cut wasn't that bad and they weren't asking for the doctor for Mitchell later on when he was cut far worse, if it was one of our fighters abroad we'd be fuming if a fight was stopped on a cut like that.

The commentators went way over the top about Selby, the fight was close and the later rounds were always going to suit Gradovich because the fight was being fought at his sort of pace, he could have easily come back and won it, although he would have needed some decent judging for that and from the scores, there hadn't been any until the fight was stopped.

Gradovich was a weak champion. He beat Dib(another weak champion), defended against Munoz, a super bantamweight who was beat up by Stephen Smith a couple of fights later, Dib again, Miskirtchian, who was European level, then drew with Velez, who was completely unproven.

Selby boxed well, but I'm not sure why his performance is being called a masterclass and he's being hailed as a superstar.

To call it a masterclass would be excessive, and I can't comment on the commentary as I watched it in the arena, but it was a very good performance and a victory over a proven world class fighter.
Which is more than either Groves or Fury have managed thus far in their careers.

G0mez wrote:

When Groves beats that bum Badou, I will remind you of that. Badou isn't even a world champion in anyone's minds. But I'm sure you will state it was a "proper KO and not a technical win" and that it happened on his turf (at which I will state that Badou is actually from Stockholm, Sweden).

But either way, you will find a way to elevate Groves as per usual for no merit.

Each month you give Groves a lofty position above current and former world champions, when the guy has basically done eff all close to what the others have done.

Usually I pass criticism on the fact, but it would seem a fair few other posters have cottoned on now too.

Groves has a better record than Selby, he is a more proven fighter and I think he would knock Selby out in a P4P fight.

keirw wrote:To call it a masterclass would be excessive, and I can't comment on the commentary as I watched it in the arena, but it was a very good performance and a victory over a proven world class fighter.
Which is more than either Groves or Fury have managed thus far in their careers.

Gradovich is not a great fighter and the ending soured it anyway.

Groves hasn't had a good win for a while, so he needs to get another one soon to stay above Selby, but hopefully he'll get it soon against Jack.

Fury's win against Chisora about 6 months ago was as good as the Gradovich win.

Horse wrote:

freddydoesdallas wrote:How can he be world class without beating a world class opponent?

Because his record is strong enough to get him a high ranking.

freddydoesdallas wrote:He may have been behind but the fact is, he won 2 and drew the other. Doesn't matter if you lose the first five and then win the next 7, you still win. Doesn't matter if you lose 11 and are losing the 12th, if you knock your opponent out you win.

I don't disagree with your ratings in general but i think you have Groves vastly overrated. He was given a shot due to being British not by earning one, got stopped in slightly strange circumstances, got obliterated in a rematch and has now moved from European to world class on that basis?

Groves was in the top 10 before the Froch fight. He was a legitimate world level contender.

Groves is not vastly overrated at all. How many places lower would you have him?

His best win is over an old (and i mean old) glen johnson. If he was top 10 before then how does 2 stoppage losses plus two poor performances in rebuilding fights justify 7th. At a real push i could just about accept 10 but he should be 11-15. You do a disservice to the othe British (&irish) boxers.

If he ends up winning his world title and beating degale then stick him wherever you want. Until then, he is a former British & commonwealth champion who has failed at genuine world level. No better than bellew, cleverly & mitchell

Horse wrote:
Unconvincing win against a weak world champion.

Groves was knocked out twice for the IBF title. Selby outclassed the IBF fighter of the year and won the world title.

Pugilist-specialist wrote:

Horse wrote:
Unconvincing win against a weak world champion.

Groves was knocked out twice for the IBF title. Selby outclassed the IBF fighter of the year and won the world title.

I think we can safely say that Gradovich wasn't really worthy of being called fighter of the year.

expe wrote:
I think we can safely say that Gradovich wasn't really worthy of being called fighter of the year.

The IBF indeed named him as their top belt holder.

http://www.sportinglife.com/boxing/news ... f-the-year

My favourite boxer froch off the list now as he has not boxed for a year..


He is retired in my eyes