BoxRec

Thanks

Horse wrote:

Deno1986 wrote:Frampton should be top of the list. Hall moving up 6 places after a defeat is strange but overall a decent list.

Hall vs Haskins was a very close fight and a lot of people scored it for Hall. I thought that the gap between them should close rather than widen afterwards.

That may be so but the scorecards say he lost the fight and a 6 place jump for losing a fight doesn't make sense, in my opinion.

Deno1986 wrote:That may be so but the scorecards say he lost the fight and a 6 place jump for losing a fight doesn't make sense, in my opinion.

It was a very close fight that a lot of people thought Hall won.

The judges' scorecards are not the be all and end all of boxing.

Stuarty30 wrote:

DannyMCR wrote:Okay boss

Yeah, hilarious.

Horse wrote:

Naandrew wrote:He should be out of the December as he won't have fought for one year.

I don't take fighters out of the rankings for being inactive for a year.

The websites rankings and ring magazine take fighters out after a year of activity. Think the alphabets do as well.

Fury simply isn't fighting again or not for a very long time.

BigDoofus wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:

BigDoofus wrote: Khan rarely goes in a boxing gym.

How do you know,out of interest?

His trainer said he needs to spend time in the gym - not just when he has a fight announced.

You're right Hunter has always said this Roach did as well.

Naandrew wrote:The websites rankings and ring magazine take fighters out after a year of activity. Think the alphabets do as well.

Fury simply isn't fighting again or not for a very long time.

It is normal for a fighter to be inactive for over a year at some point in their career.

I think that only being inactive for a year is too soon to take a fighter out of the rankings, if they state that they intend to continue fighting.

It seems a bit silly to overreact to something that happens so often in boxing.