BoxRec

Stuarty30 wrote:

Horse wrote:

BitPlayer wrote:Has Eubank really done anything to move up?

He defended his British title. Maybe I was too generous.

His close loss to Saunders is getting towards two years ago now, so I should give him less credit for that in the future.

Depends what he does afterwards?

He's improved since the Saunders fight (before which he had fought nobody with a pulse), no? And Saunders, even though I find him personally dislikeable, has gone on to do impressive things and I think you have him too low.

Switch hitter wrote:Groves should not be top 10 most of the top 22 have done more or deserve to be higher than him...

Groves has beaten the no.2 on the list and he beat Murray last Saturday who was somehow in the top 10.

Boxerbeetle wrote:Murray finally now where he should have been all along

No.

Switch hitter wrote:Groves should not be top 10 most of the top 22 have done more or deserve to be higher than him...

Where should he be ranked then?

davie wrote:Martin Murray and Tony Bellew exactly where they deserve to be


And all is right in the world!

BigDoofus wrote:Is it fair to suggest that you were over-rating Murray?

No.

G0mez wrote:Groves, who is not even the best super middle in the UK, gets catapulted into your top 10 after beating a career-middleweight who has incidentally also never won a world title?

And yet there are numerous world title holders and former champions.. Below him.

So?

G0mez wrote:If he was unbeaten and in the ascendancy I could probably see your point. But he has been stopped twice and dropped by a weak champion in another loss in the last couple of years or so.

He doesn't even a body of work or a list of previous achievements to bolster his position.

Groves has a good record. That's why he's in the top 10.

Horse wrote:

G0mez wrote:Groves, who is not even the best super middle in the UK, gets catapulted into your top 10 after beating a career-middleweight who has incidentally also never won a world title?

And yet there are numerous world title holders and former champions.. Below him.

So?

G0mez wrote:If he was unbeaten and in the ascendancy I could probably see your point. But he has been stopped twice and dropped by a weak champion in another loss in the last couple of years or so.

He doesn't even a body of work or a list of previous achievements to bolster his position.

Groves has a good record. That's why he's in the top 10.

Murray aside who is Groves best wins? He's performed better in defeat than he has in victory. DeGale is a good win but a result that he arguably lost.

clopixolacuphase wrote:

Stuarty30 wrote:

Horse wrote:He defended his British title. Maybe I was too generous.

His close loss to Saunders is getting towards two years ago now, so I should give him less credit for that in the future.

Depends what he does afterwards?

He's improved since the Saunders fight (before which he had fought nobody with a pulse), no? And Saunders, even though I find him personally dislikeable, has gone on to do impressive things and I think you have him too low.

I thought Saunders had improved in his fight with Andy Lee. He's looked better but has been fighting at a lower level again.

BitPlayer wrote:

clopixolacuphase wrote:

Stuarty30 wrote:
Depends what he does afterwards?

He's improved since the Saunders fight (before which he had fought nobody with a pulse), no? And Saunders, even though I find him personally dislikeable, has gone on to do impressive things and I think you have him too low.

I thought Saunders had improved in his fight with Andy Lee. He's looked better but has been fighting at a lower level again.

Saunders is a master boxer. He will look good against inferior opposition. Eubank as a novice made him look silly for some rounds. If they fought again I'd place big money on Eubank!

Stuarty30 wrote:Nah! He got smacked around! I'll reserve my respect for someone more deserving!

Khan isn't deserving of respect?

Then who is?

Naandrew wrote:Well Liam will be top 5 if he somehow wins his next fight.

Unless it's some sort of lame technicality or bizarre robbery.

clopixolacuphase wrote:He's improved since the Saunders fight (before which he had fought nobody with a pulse), no? And Saunders, even though I find him personally dislikeable, has gone on to do impressive things and I think you have him too low.

Saunders' stamina still looks weak and I don't think Lee is that great.

I think both Groves and Bellew have better records than Saunders.

Horse wrote:

Switch hitter wrote:Groves should not be top 10 most of the top 22 have done more or deserve to be higher than him...

Where should he be ranked then?

About 20ish......

Stuarty30 wrote:Murray aside who is Groves best wins? He's performed better in defeat than he has in victory. DeGale is a good win but a result that he arguably lost.

George Groves

James DeGale
Carl Froch I - (Lost)
Martin Murray
Carl Froch II - (Lost)
Badou Jack - (Lost)
Glen Johnson
Paul Smith
Christopher Rebrasse
Francisco Sierra
Kenny Anderson

Switch hitter wrote:About 20ish......

Your P4P rankings would be horrendous.

Horse wrote:

Stuarty30 wrote:Murray aside who is Groves best wins? He's performed better in defeat than he has in victory. DeGale is a good win but a result that he arguably lost.

George Groves

James DeGale
Carl Froch I - (Lost)
Martin Murray
Carl Froch II - (Lost)
Badou Jack - (Lost)
Glen Johnson
Paul Smith
Christopher Rebrasse
Francisco Sierra
Kenny Anderson

To be fair that's a pretty good record good names and Groves is still young, I think if Groves does get that world belt, he will get over a lot of those demons from the Frock KO and become a good world title holder for a couple of years at least.

jboxing1111 wrote:stopped looking once you put mcdonnell ahead of billy joe.

why?

Stuarty30 wrote:
Murray aside who is Groves best wins? He's performed better in defeat than he has in victory. DeGale is a good win but a result that he arguably lost.

Degale is the highest-ranked super-middle in the world - of course it was a good win.

Horse wrote:

Switch hitter wrote:About 20ish......

Your P4P rankings would be horrendous.

But at least he will be in the right spot....

Switch hitter wrote:But at least he will be in the right spot....

No, he wouldn't be.

Very very poor list. Is it based on talent, potential or results?

reggaereggae wrote:Very very poor list. Is it based on talent, potential or results?

You are clueless.

Go away.

Horse wrote:

Switch hitter wrote:About 20ish......

Your P4P rankings would be horrendous.

Joshua below Murray? Please Sir, tell me it aint so.

Murray has never beaten a decent fighter in his career. Dillian Whyte is better than any victory Murray has ever had. Am I right or wrong? if wrong, who has Murray beaten that`s a better win than Whyte?

No prizes in this sport for gallant losers.