BoxRec

With people bickering over who is and is not worlds class, it got me thinking, where does world class start? Is it top 10, top 5? Or do you have to fight for a world belt to belong to that bracket? It seems to me 'world class' is a matter of opinion for many.

To me it's a fighter that operates at world level consistently.

E.G

Khan (world Class) > Mcloskey (european class) > Lenny Daws (domestic class)

funtime wrote:To me it's a fighter that operates at world level consistently.

E.G

Khan (world Class) > Mcloskey (european class) > Lenny Daws (domestic class)

I agree with that sentiment and take it further by saying guys who are ranked in the top 10-15 are world class 15-40 and probably European and domestic level and then 41 downwards on the world list.

World Class
David Haye
Carl Froch
Amir Khan

European
Brian Magee
Matthew Hatton
Darren Barker (but who knows)

Domestic
Paul Smith
Tyson Fury
Ashley Theophane.

IRLangmaid25 wrote:

funtime wrote:To me it's a fighter that operates at world level consistently.

E.G

Khan (world Class) > Mcloskey (european class) > Lenny Daws (domestic class)

I agree with that sentiment and take it further by saying guys who are ranked in the top 10-15 are world class 15-40 and probably European and domestic level and then 41 downwards on the world list.

World Class
David Haye
Carl Froch
Amir Khan

European
Brian Magee
Matthew Hatton
Darren Barker (but who knows)

Domestic
Paul Smith
Tyson Fury
Ashley Theophane.

100% agree with you.

A fighter who can dominate/compete very effectively in their continent and others.

Europe/Americas/Commonwealth..

If you can compete very effectively in the Americas you are WORLD CLASS!

funtime wrote:To me it's a fighter that operates at world level consistently.

E.G

Khan (world Class) > Mcloskey (european class) > Lenny Daws (domestic class)

Spot on. Raking has nothing to do with it because you could have 1 division with only 5 quality fighters but another division with 30. Class of a fighter should depend purely on their skill level and ability to consistently mix it up with the best not how many fighters are ranked above them. It would be foolish to think you can pin it down to a set number of fighters and try to apply that to every division.

A fighter can be called 'World Class', based upon his/her resume, the and the succes they enjoy.

A guy, constantly pitched over his head and constantly getting sparked is not 'World Class', for example.

For me its a fighter who on their day look capable of beating one of the Big 4 champions in the division. So can depend on the depth of the division. E.g. with Bunderage was IBF champ, there might be alot of world class Light Middles.

A fighter for me who just fell into the world class bracket, but wasn't for some was Oktay Urkal...... looked better than Vivian Harris in their first fight.

bengulnaci1 wrote:A fighter can be called 'World Class', based upon his/her resume, the and the succes they enjoy.

A guy, constantly pitched over his head and constantly getting sparked is not 'World Class', for example.

Where does that put Hatton? Hatton was basically a good european fighter, he roughhoused KT with the help of Dave 'bent' Parris. He struggked against Collazo and Urango. Beaten badly by floyd and manny.
Good Euro level fighter. Was an entertainer through and through.

Although Hatton, imo, did ok against Mayweather, was sparked by Pac and beat KT, Lazcano, Castillo, Urango, Collazo and Maliniaggi, so there are decent names there, in bouts he either won or was atleast reasonably competitive.

So I would bracket him as 'World Class', in his pomp, who lost to the 2 p4p No1 & 2. Not too shabby, really.

The term 'World class' gets bandied around way too much nowadays, as people tend to base this on rankings, which is worng, in my opinion.

I prefer to look at who they fought and how they competed and not necessarily if they won or lost.

THE MESSIAH wrote:

bengulnaci1 wrote:A fighter can be called 'World Class', based upon his/her resume, the and the succes they enjoy.

A guy, constantly pitched over his head and constantly getting sparked is not 'World Class', for example.

Where does that put Hatton? Hatton was basically a good european fighter, he roughhoused KT with the help of Dave 'bent' Parris. He struggked against Collazo and Urango. Beaten badly by floyd and manny.
Good Euro level fighter. Was an entertainer through and through.

Nonsense. Hatton was undoubtedly world-class rather than a good Euro-level fighter. He performed at world level for a number of years and only lost to two modern greats. Your assessment of the Tzysu fight reveals your inherent bias.

Deserter wrote:

THE MESSIAH wrote:

bengulnaci1 wrote:A fighter can be called 'World Class', based upon his/her resume, the and the succes they enjoy.

A guy, constantly pitched over his head and constantly getting sparked is not 'World Class', for example.

Where does that put Hatton? Hatton was basically a good european fighter, he roughhoused KT with the help of Dave 'bent' Parris. He struggked against Collazo and Urango. Beaten badly by floyd and manny.
Good Euro level fighter. Was an entertainer through and through.

Nonsense. Hatton was undoubtedly world-class rather than a good Euro-level fighter. He performed at world level for a number of years and only lost to two modern greats. Your assessment of the Tzysu fight reveals your inherent bias.

Do you think Mills Lane ( for example) would allown all the holding and rough house tactics?

Hatton clinched all the way against Urango, Collazo had it down and almost out.

Its no coincidence he landed NOTHING against PBF and Pac stretched him quicker than he has anyone in many many years. Even Diaz and other lightweights lasted much longer...

Hatton was a good fighter, but he had a patchy world campaign, unless you like his wbu reign.

THE MESSIAH wrote:

Deserter wrote:

THE MESSIAH wrote:
Where does that put Hatton? Hatton was basically a good european fighter, he roughhoused KT with the help of Dave 'bent' Parris. He struggked against Collazo and Urango. Beaten badly by floyd and manny.
Good Euro level fighter. Was an entertainer through and through.

Nonsense. Hatton was undoubtedly world-class rather than a good Euro-level fighter. He performed at world level for a number of years and only lost to two modern greats. Your assessment of the Tzysu fight reveals your inherent bias.

Do you think Mills Lane ( for example) would allown all the holding and rough house tactics?

Hatton clinched all the way against Urango, Collazo had it down and almost out.

Its no coincidence he landed NOTHING against PBF and Pac stretched him quicker than he has anyone in many many years. Even Diaz and other lightweights lasted much longer...

Hatton was a good fighter, but he had a patchy world campaign, unless you like his wbu reign.

To turn on its head, do you think a Euro-level fighter could beat Tsyzu because of a referee's help? Also worth remembering that KT and his team didn't ever suggest that was the case either.
Keep on trolling though...

Hatton was undoubted world class! Except Collazo, i dont recall him even in any close fights. He 'struggled' with Urango? Maybe with himself, but still managed a shutout! Its ridiculous to call him anything other.

In terms of finding an exact definition, I would say a world class fighter is one whom has a winning record after fights against at least two of the top ten ranked (as per The Ring) fighters in the division, including a win over a top five ranked opponent and is top five ranked themselves.

THE MESSIAH wrote:

Deserter wrote:

THE MESSIAH wrote:
Where does that put Hatton? Hatton was basically a good european fighter, he roughhoused KT with the help of Dave 'bent' Parris. He struggked against Collazo and Urango. Beaten badly by floyd and manny.
Good Euro level fighter. Was an entertainer through and through.

Nonsense. Hatton was undoubtedly world-class rather than a good Euro-level fighter. He performed at world level for a number of years and only lost to two modern greats. Your assessment of the Tzysu fight reveals your inherent bias.

Do you think Mills Lane ( for example) would allown all the holding and rough house tactics?

Hatton clinched all the way against Urango, Collazo had it down and almost out.

Its no coincidence he landed NOTHING against PBF and Pac stretched him quicker than he has anyone in many many years. Even Diaz and other lightweights lasted much longer...

Hatton was a good fighter, but he had a patchy world campaign, unless you like his wbu reign.

He was a 2 weight world champion and came up short twice fighting for PFP. Pretty good i'd say

THE MESSIAH wrote:

bengulnaci1 wrote:A fighter can be called 'World Class', based upon his/her resume, the and the succes they enjoy.

A guy, constantly pitched over his head and constantly getting sparked is not 'World Class', for example.

Where does that put Hatton? Hatton was basically a good european fighter, he roughhoused KT with the help of Dave 'bent' Parris. He struggked against Collazo and Urango. Beaten badly by floyd and manny.
Good Euro level fighter. Was an entertainer through and through.

What on earth is this post about? Hatton a Euro level fighter? That is absurd.

I don't think Ricky Hatton was ever a complete fighter which is possibly why both of his losses were so crushingly emphatic (judging by some of his interviews he'd be the first to agree that defence wasn't his strongest attribute) but the things that he did do effectively were good enough to earn him distinction at world-level.

Also a lot of revisionist history seems to pop up with reference to his victory over Kostya Tszyu, I've seen that fight quite recently and the reason why Hatton won it is because he systematically beat the stuffing out KT and made him quit, taking many hard punches in the process.

THE MESSIAH wrote:

bengulnaci1 wrote:A fighter can be called 'World Class', based upon his/her resume, the and the succes they enjoy.

A guy, constantly pitched over his head and constantly getting sparked is not 'World Class', for example.

Where does that put Hatton? Hatton was basically a good european fighter, he roughhoused KT with the help of Dave 'bent' Parris. He struggked against Collazo and Urango. Beaten badly by floyd and manny.
Good Euro level fighter. Was an entertainer through and through.

Literally the worst post I have ever seen on any forum ever. Hatton was undisputed 140 champ for 4 years and won that honour by making one of the all-time greatest 140 fighters quit on his stool. Have a word with yourself.

world class = someone who can consistently compete and hold their own against anyone in the world, barring the elite types ( floyd, manny, sergio, couple of others )

I personally reguard the peformance( running champs and contenders close) rather than the result everytime. So you'll be unsuprised to hear two of my favourite fighters were Mickey Ward and Emanual Burton/Augustus- both could mix with the best but very often didn't get the result.

Trojans44 wrote:

THE MESSIAH wrote:

bengulnaci1 wrote:A fighter can be called 'World Class', based upon his/her resume, the and the succes they enjoy.

A guy, constantly pitched over his head and constantly getting sparked is not 'World Class', for example.

Where does that put Hatton? Hatton was basically a good european fighter, he roughhoused KT with the help of Dave 'bent' Parris. He struggked against Collazo and Urango. Beaten badly by floyd and manny.
Good Euro level fighter. Was an entertainer through and through.

Literally the worst post I have ever seen on any forum ever. Hatton was undisputed 140 champ for 4 years and won that honour by making one of the all-time greatest 140 fighters quit on his stool. Have a word with yourself.

Which 4 years was that?

He beat kt in 2005 and was ring magazine champ until he lost to pacqiauo in 2009.

Trojans44 wrote:He beat kt in 2005 and was ring magazine champ until he lost to pacqiauo in 2009.

It was not a prime version. He did not fight his way into contention by beating top contenders. He had a 40-0 record fighting lightweights and the likes. He then struggled virtually every time he fought at world level bar Maligananni and Castillo.


Good fighter, ok, TOP European class.

stujones wrote:For me its a fighter who on their day look capable of beating one of the Big 4 champions in the division.

Yeah, this is pretty much my definition (after King's, like). McCallum missed out on the Fab Four, but I totally considered him world-class because I couldn't imagine any of the champs having an easy night.

So it's not the percentage of top-level wins for me, but the nature of those fights. If you've fought a few big fighters and always made an argument of it, I think you're world-class until you lose badly. If that hasn't happened by the end of a competitive career (discounting shot fights), then you obviously were.