BoxRec

Captain Hook wrote:Props to you for being enthusiastic enough to do a list, I for one would never deny or try to deny you your opinion.

But a lot of it is Horse shit :)

Captain Hook wrote:Lenny - agree with you mate, but there are just so many contradictions. Personally I'd have Napa around the 17/18 mark on recent form.

Contradictions?

Captain Hook wrote:Horse just give this list up and get a job, it's a effing joke and your attitude is as well.

Are you being Facetious or a hypocrite with this comment.

Captain Hook wrote:Your arguments for some of these fighters are laughable.

Stop being so vague.

Mario wrote:When was Wayne McCulloch's last good win?

A long time ago.

Mario wrote:Gonna just ignore that one eh? Im not surprised because i'll tell you when it was, 1998. 10 years ago.

I answer posts in order. You have to wait your turn.

Mario wrote:Your list is a joke and it makes you look like a effing idiot.

And comments like this make you come across as a nasty piece of work.

Apart from the "usual suspects" in the top 10 or so your list is missing a lot of good people and over hyping others..

You are coming across as very niaive - Captain Hook is a boxing journalist for gods sake, give it a rest mate... you're not down the pub now and you can't just shout someone down on a forum..

Captain Hook wrote:Harrison is not out of the ring because of politics, he was out of the ring because he's a drunken bully and prefers fighting in bars and getting in trouble to getting fit.

Do you call that politics?

He has not been given his license back. That is political. I do accept that most of his inactivity is not political though.

So why do you have an unlicensed fighter in your list then?

stujones wrote:

Horse wrote:

stujones wrote:Bit harsh not to have Cook in at all when he was active. He was an ex EBU champion - beaten Zoff who went on to reclaim that title.

You didn't put him on your list either!

Depends on when you read the list... and depends on how long you've been running your list privately.

But you said... "I never had him in when he was active".... Well I did have Cook in when he was active - but I eliminated him for being inactive... AS I HAVE WAYNE and SCOTT.

I had only been doing this list a few weeks before I first posted it on the internet on May 1st 2006. About 5 Months after Jason Cook's DQ win over Gary Reid. About the same time that you wrote your list that I am referring to.

I was referring to the time before he retired as being "active". I appreciate that you may not consider Cook at that time to have been "active". I apologize for any misunderstanding.

chris_23 wrote:Apart from the "usual suspects" in the top 10 or so your list is missing a lot of good people and over hyping others..

I really don't think my list is missing a lot of good people. One or two maybe.

chris_23 wrote:You are coming across as very niaive - Captain Hook is a boxing journalist for gods sake, give it a rest mate... you're not down the pub now and you can't just shout someone down on a forum..

So what if he is a boxing journalist? I cannot disagree with him? I have to bow down to his superior knowledge?

Who have I shouted down?

This is, in my opinion, the worst post I have ever responded to on The British Top 30 P4P rankings.

MBP wrote:So why do you have an unlicensed fighter in your list then?

Because he has not retired.

He will most likely get his license back in a month or so, and he should return to the ring within the next six months, hopefully.

Seriously, anyone who hasn't fought in the last 12 months should be removed through inactivity. No grey areas then. McCullough should not be there I think everyone would agree. Your failure to remove people through inactivity makes the whole list a joke I am afraid.

Perhaps calling you a fornicating idiot was slightly harsh and i apologise if i caused offence, but seriously, 10 years is a long, long, long time and you simply cannot justify having him in any kind of current p4p list. It makes a mockery of the whole thing.

His last win against a half decent opponent was in 1998 and Naz beat him after that, and went on to win 4 more world title fights. So where is The Prince on your list?

nickd wrote:Seriously, anyone who hasn't fought in the last 12 months should be removed through inactivity. No grey areas then. McCullough should not be there I think everyone would agree. Your failure to remove people through inactivity makes the whole list a joke I am afraid.

Mario wrote:Perhaps calling you a effing idiot was slightly harsh and i apologise if i caused offence, but seriously, 10 years is a long, long, long time and you simply cannot justify having him in any kind of current p4p list. It makes a mockery of the whole thing.

His last win against a half decent opponent was in 1998 and Naz beat him after that, and went on to win 4 more world title fights. So where is The Prince on your list?

I have a policy of not removing fighters for inactivity. Another case like McCullough's is unlikely to arise again, as if I had been running the list for longer McCullough would most likely have fallen out a long time ago. I know it is somewhat ridiculous, but I don't want to change my policy when he is likely to fall out soon anyway. Until then I guess I have mockery coming to me.

Horse these Rating are based your say so?
Who are ya, dont take this rude..

Just like to know what you've done in Boxing? Then maybe have respect for your rating.

MBP wrote:Horse these Rating are based your say so?
Who are ya, dont take this rude..

Just like to know what you've done in Boxing? Then maybe have respect for your rating.

I have not done much in boxing. These rankings are just my opinion.

The rankings will be better next month.

Horse wrote:

stujones wrote:

Horse wrote:You didn't put him on your list either!

Depends on when you read the list... and depends on how long you've been running your list privately.

But you said... "I never had him in when he was active".... Well I did have Cook in when he was active - but I eliminated him for being inactive... AS I HAVE WAYNE and SCOTT.

I had only been doing this list a few weeks before I first posted it on the internet on May 1st 2006. About 5 Months after Jason Cook's DQ win over Gary Reid. About the same time that you wrote your list that I am referring to.

I was referring to the time before he retired as being "active". I appreciate that you may not consider Cook at that time to have been "active". I apologize for any misunderstanding.

Cook had announced his retirment I believe before that's why he was not in my list.... and I don't argue with you for not having him in. Just he is now has announced his return so for me he is now in the "inactive" section - not retired... which for your criteria means he is eligable. For me both him and McCullough should be eliminated (with Harrison).

Another fighter who now might be worthy of consideration - and this is coming from a sceptic of him is Herbie Hide... Rudiger May is a decent level operator. A former European Champion. I would even say that this might be Herbie's best win of his career.

stujones wrote:Cook had announced his retirment I believe before that's why he was not in my list.... and I don't argue with you for not having him in. Just he is now has announced his return so for me he is now in the "inactive" section - not retired... which for your criteria means he is eligable. For me both him and McCullough should be eliminated (with Harrison).

I believe Cook announced his retirement when he was given a European title shot, which he declined, so the shot went to Bami (I could be wrong).

stujones wrote:Another fighter who now might be worthy of consideration - and this is coming from a sceptic of him is Herbie Hide... Rudiger May is a decent level operator. A former European Champion. I would even say that this might be Herbie's best win of his career.

I don't think May was ever the full European champion. Either way it was still a good win for Hide as was his win before that. Hide should enter the list with another good win. Perhaps he should have entered before, but I have not been following his career closely as he is based in Germany.

Sorry you are right. He drew for the EBU title - and won the EU championship.

chris_23 wrote:Apart from the "usual suspects" in the top 10 or so your list is missing a lot of good people and over hyping others..

You are coming across as very niaive - Captain Hook is a boxing journalist for gods sake, give it a rest mate... you're not down the pub now and you can't just shout someone down on a forum..

Cheers for the supportive comment mate but I'm not a boxing journalist.

I'm a journalist by trade but when it comes to boxing I'm like a few of the lads on here, write the occasional preview, review and interview....out of love for the sport.

And I agree with NickD, it's just a list dreamt up by a bloke in his bedroom to get a reaction, the lion's share of it is just daft.

Good on you Horse, for at least being interested enough to do one, but you should take a few of the lads' points on board.

PS Don't steal my insults :)

Captain Hook wrote:And I agree with NickD, it's just a list dreamt up by a bloke in his bedroom to get a reaction, the lion's share of it is just daft.

Good on you Horse, for at least being interested enough to do one, but you should take a few of the lads' points on board.

PS Don't steal my insults :)

To be fair - I think the tops all of us combined are arguing over is 10 fighters... some who should be in, some who should be out. So its hardly the lions share.

Captain Hook wrote:And I agree with NickD, it's just a list dreamt up by a bloke in his bedroom to get a reaction, the lion's share of it is just daft.

Good on you Horse, for at least being interested enough to do one, but you should take a few of the lads' points on board.

I disagree with most of it being daft. McCullough and Harrison still being in the list and maybe the exclusion of Matthews could be described as daft. But most of it? I don't think so. I probably should listen to others advice a little more though.

Captain Hook wrote:PS Don't steal my insults :)

It had to be done. :)

stujones wrote:

Captain Hook wrote:And I agree with NickD, it's just a list dreamt up by a bloke in his bedroom to get a reaction, the lion's share of it is just daft.

Good on you Horse, for at least being interested enough to do one, but you should take a few of the lads' points on board.

PS Don't steal my insults :)

To be fair - I think the tops all of us combined are arguing over is 10 fighters... some who should be in, some who should be out. So its hardly the lions share.

Thank you.

We love you really Horse, you just need a push in the right direction :)

Myself and StuJones will send you a group hug

Captain Hook wrote:We love you really Horse, you just need a push in the right direction :)

Myself and StuJones will send you a group hug

Just no Teddy Bears involved!!!! LOL!.

Captain Hook wrote:We love you really Horse, you just need a push in the right direction :)

Myself and StuJones will send you a group hug

Thanks guys.