BoxRec

1. Lucian Bute
2. Andre Ward
3. Mikkel Kessler
4. Carl Froch
5. Glencoffe Johnson
6. Kelly Pavlik
7. Arthur Abraham
8. Sakio Bika
9. Robert Stieglitz
10. Dimitri Sartison

Lucian Bute at No.1? What the hell? He's got ONE win over a guy in that Top Ten (Bika at No.8 ). Froch is 2-1 against Top Ten opponents (having beaten Johnson and Abraham at 5 and 7 respectively, and lost to no.3 Kessler); Kessler is 1-1 (beating no.4 Froch, losing to no. 2 Ward). How is Dirrell not in these ratings but Abraham is up at no. 7? Why is Bute consistently rated on his potential rather than results? What is Pavlik doing in these rankings? Where's my medication?

Taylor and Pascal were top 10 too, so Froch is really 4-1

I'm bemused why Pavlik is there...

JDC wrote:Taylor and Pascal were top 10 too, so Froch is really 4-1

Very true. I suppose you could make the argument that Andrade was Top Ten when Bute beat him, and (at a stretch) Miranda, although Miranda is very questionable. My point stands nonetheless: Bute's opposition absolutely does not warrant a No. 1 spot.

JDC wrote:Taylor and Pascal were top 10 too, so Froch is really 4-1

Pascal - who did Pascal beat to warrant a top ten ranking at the time of the Froch fight? I would have Bute at #3 currently, but I do personally agree with the Froch ranking of #4. Ward should be #1 undeniably.

dookus wrote:

JDC wrote:Taylor and Pascal were top 10 too, so Froch is really 4-1

Very true. I suppose you could make the argument that Andrade was Top Ten when Bute beat him, and (at a stretch) Miranda, although Miranda is very questionable. My point stands nonetheless: Bute's opposition absolutely does not warrant a No. 1 spot.

I do agree, espcially given the manner of Wards wins against top #7 opposition. However, Bute record isn't as poor as it is suggested elsewhere. He has many many good wins over very solid opposition if not the best of the best - Andrade top ten when he beat him twice, Berrio surely was a top ten fighter when Bute beat him for the IBF title, Miranda top 15 I would say, Zuniga top 15, Magee top 15 (possibly top 10), Tateosvyan top 15 at the time, Brinkley top 15, Toney top 15 (Middleweight).

stujones wrote:

dookus wrote:

JDC wrote:Taylor and Pascal were top 10 too, so Froch is really 4-1

Very true. I suppose you could make the argument that Andrade was Top Ten when Bute beat him, and (at a stretch) Miranda, although Miranda is very questionable. My point stands nonetheless: Bute's opposition absolutely does not warrant a No. 1 spot.

I do agree, espcially given the manner of Wards wins against top #7 opposition. However, Bute record isn't as poor as it is suggested elsewhere. He has many many good wins over very solid opposition if not the best of the best - Andrade top ten when he beat him twice, Berrio surely was a top ten fighter when Bute beat him for the IBF title, Miranda top 15 I would say, Zuniga top 15, Magee top 15 (possibly top 10), Tateosvyan top 15 at the time, Brinkley top 15, Toney top 15 (Middleweight).

That's true, he's got a very long list of victories over fringe-contender level fighters. The thing is, in my view, that kind of CV gets you into the top ten, perhaps high in the top ten, but certainly not number 1. Not when there are guys like Ward and Froch there with a much higher level of opposition.

dookus wrote:

stujones wrote:

dookus wrote: Very true. I suppose you could make the argument that Andrade was Top Ten when Bute beat him, and (at a stretch) Miranda, although Miranda is very questionable. My point stands nonetheless: Bute's opposition absolutely does not warrant a No. 1 spot.

I do agree, espcially given the manner of Wards wins against top #7 opposition. However, Bute record isn't as poor as it is suggested elsewhere. He has many many good wins over very solid opposition if not the best of the best - Andrade top ten when he beat him twice, Berrio surely was a top ten fighter when Bute beat him for the IBF title, Miranda top 15 I would say, Zuniga top 15, Magee top 15 (possibly top 10), Tateosvyan top 15 at the time, Brinkley top 15, Toney top 15 (Middleweight).

That's true, he's got a very long list of victories over fringe-contender level fighters. The thing is, in my view, that kind of CV gets you into the top ten, perhaps high in the top ten, but certainly not number 1. Not when there are guys like Ward and Froch there with a much higher level of opposition.

Ward yes..... for me, but its just my personal opinion I still think that defeat vs Kessler is costing Froch quite a bit. All could change in a few months, and if Froch beats Ward he is clearly #1, Ward would move down to #2, Kessler #3, Bute #4.

dookus wrote:1. Lucian Bute
2. Andre Ward
3. Mikkel Kessler
4. Carl Froch
5. Glencoffe Johnson
6. Kelly Pavlik
7. Arthur Abraham
8. Sakio Bika
9. Robert Stieglitz
10. Dimitri Sartison

Lucian Bute at No.1? What the hell? He's got ONE win over a guy in that Top Ten (Bika at No.8 ). Froch is 2-1 against Top Ten opponents (having beaten Johnson and Abraham at 5 and 7 respectively, and lost to no.3 Kessler); Kessler is 1-1 (beating no.4 Froch, losing to no. 2 Ward). How is Dirrell not in these ratings but Abraham is up at no. 7? Why is Bute consistently rated on his potential rather than results? What is Pavlik doing in these rankings? Where's my medication?

Dirrell hasn't fought in over a year, and has rightly been removed from the ratings.

You are right that Bute doesn't deserve to be there based on his achievements thus far.

I'd say......

1. Froch
2. Ward
3. Kessler
4. Bute
5. Johnson

Froch is probably ahead of Ward at the minute, despite Ward having the W over Kessler, Froch dominated Abraham more thoroughly and also defeated Johnson pretty convincingly, who is a better fighter than Bika.

Bute facing Mendy next is an absolute disgrace.

As a general theme I'm never too impressed with the BM ratings, despite the mag being an excellent read generally..... it's something that they ought to sharpen up on but not something that will make me cancel my subscription.

Think we had this debate before - I cannot really see where AA got close to Ward. I cannot see the logic in having Froch above Ward, but each to their own. Opinions is what makes the world go around.

For me a dominant win over the #3 ranked fighter, compared to a loss to him is more important than a 12 round points shutout win over the #7 ranked fighter compared to a 11 round points win over the same fighter

Its should be

Ward
Kessler
Froch
Bute

kingfinn wrote:Its should be

Ward
Kessler
Froch
Bute

Agree with that, Froch deserves to be above Bute imo

Final round wrote:

kingfinn wrote:Its should be

Ward
Kessler
Froch
Bute

Agree with that, Froch deserves to be above Bute imo

My view is - Butes beaten? - frochs beaten plenty but was beaten by Kessler and Wards beaten Kessler, AA, Bika, Green and Miranda (thats two of butes best opponent in there) so how the hell can bute be top.

LeedsLad wrote:

dookus wrote:1. Lucian Bute
2. Andre Ward
3. Mikkel Kessler
4. Carl Froch
5. Glencoffe Johnson
6. Kelly Pavlik
7. Arthur Abraham
8. Sakio Bika
9. Robert Stieglitz
10. Dimitri Sartison

Lucian Bute at No.1? What the hell? He's got ONE win over a guy in that Top Ten (Bika at No.8 ). Froch is 2-1 against Top Ten opponents (having beaten Johnson and Abraham at 5 and 7 respectively, and lost to no.3 Kessler); Kessler is 1-1 (beating no.4 Froch, losing to no. 2 Ward). How is Dirrell not in these ratings but Abraham is up at no. 7? Why is Bute consistently rated on his potential rather than results? What is Pavlik doing in these rankings? Where's my medication?

Dirrell hasn't fought in over a year, and has rightly been removed from the ratings.

You are right that Bute doesn't deserve to be there based on his achievements thus far.

I'd say......

1. Froch
2. Ward
3. Kessler
4. Bute
5. Johnson

Froch is probably ahead of Ward at the minute, despite Ward having the W over Kessler, Froch dominated Abraham more thoroughly and also defeated Johnson pretty convincingly, who is a better fighter than Bika.

Bute facing Mendy next is an absolute disgrace.

As a general theme I'm never too impressed with the BM ratings, despite the mag being an excellent read generally..... it's something that they ought to sharpen up on but not something that will make me cancel my subscription.

Overall Froch definitely has a better resume than Ward does, but I see little significance in the fact that Froch won 11/12 rounds against AA and Ward "only" won 10/11. There is a much, much bigger gap in their respective performances against Kessler.

Also, Mendy is Bute's mandatory, so while the bout my be a disgrace, Bute has to take it.

My Top 5 at SMW

1. Froch (could be Ward)
2. Ward (could be Froch)
3. Kessler
4. Bute
5. Stieglitz

Also, I'd say that having Danny Green ranked #1 at cruiserweight is a bigger slip-up than this. If the people from Boxing Monthly read this, please tell me how Green places above Cunningham, Huck, Wlod, and Lebedev. I can see a tenous case for having Green ahead of the last two, but Cunningham and Huck have done WAAAY more than Green has.

Lebedev would smash Green up IMO, too powerful and too much output for Green to deal with.

stujones wrote:

JDC wrote:Taylor and Pascal were top 10 too, so Froch is really 4-1

Pascal - who did Pascal beat to warrant a top ten ranking at the time of the Froch fight? I would have Bute at #3 currently, but I do personally agree with the Froch ranking of #4. Ward should be #1 undeniably.

Sorry, your right. But after the fight he would have been a top ten despite losing. Similar with Dirrell

Final round wrote:

kingfinn wrote:Its should be

Ward
Kessler
Froch
Bute

Agree with that, Froch deserves to be above Bute imo

Yep, I'm with you guys on that run-down as well

Bute was No. 1 before the start of Super Six and has benefited from not being involved - no one has fought and beat him. Unlike other ratings, ours are based on results — fighters have to beat the fighter above them etc, and generally move down after a loss etc. Opinions don't come into it. I don't like opinion-based ratings. I want readers to always know that BM's ratings are based on results, facts, not how we feel when we wake up in the morning, like with the sanctioning bodies etc.

But my own view is Ward, Kessler, Froch, Bute in that order also.

Glyn Leach wrote:Bute was No. 1 before the start of Super Six and has benefited from not being involved - no one has fought and beat him. Unlike other ratings, ours are based on results — fighters have to beat the fighter above them etc, and generally move down after a loss etc. Opinions don't come into it. I don't like opinion-based ratings. I want readers to always know that BM's ratings are based on results, facts, not how we feel when we wake up in the morning, like with the sanctioning bodies etc.

But my own view is Ward, Kessler, Froch, Bute in that order also.

This is wrong and is why I like the Ring ratings. Bute has not faced the same opposition so he should be dropped down. If Bute continues to fight bums and either Froch or Ward beat everybody else in the top ten then your ratings will look very silly indeed. The Ring ratings are panel based and I am glad they pushed Froch to 2 and Bute to 3 so that he and Ward could fight it out for the title.

crusader wrote:

LeedsLad wrote:

dookus wrote:1. Lucian Bute
2. Andre Ward
3. Mikkel Kessler
4. Carl Froch
5. Glencoffe Johnson
6. Kelly Pavlik
7. Arthur Abraham
8. Sakio Bika
9. Robert Stieglitz
10. Dimitri Sartison

Lucian Bute at No.1? What the hell? He's got ONE win over a guy in that Top Ten (Bika at No.8 ). Froch is 2-1 against Top Ten opponents (having beaten Johnson and Abraham at 5 and 7 respectively, and lost to no.3 Kessler); Kessler is 1-1 (beating no.4 Froch, losing to no. 2 Ward). How is Dirrell not in these ratings but Abraham is up at no. 7? Why is Bute consistently rated on his potential rather than results? What is Pavlik doing in these rankings? Where's my medication?

Dirrell hasn't fought in over a year, and has rightly been removed from the ratings.

You are right that Bute doesn't deserve to be there based on his achievements thus far.

I'd say......

1. Froch
2. Ward
3. Kessler
4. Bute
5. Johnson

Froch is probably ahead of Ward at the minute, despite Ward having the W over Kessler, Froch dominated Abraham more thoroughly and also defeated Johnson pretty convincingly, who is a better fighter than Bika.

Bute facing Mendy next is an absolute disgrace.

As a general theme I'm never too impressed with the BM ratings, despite the mag being an excellent read generally..... it's something that they ought to sharpen up on but not something that will make me cancel my subscription.

Overall Froch definitely has a better resume than Ward does, but I see little significance in the fact that Froch won 11/12 rounds against AA and Ward "only" won 10/11. There is a much, much bigger gap in their respective performances against Kessler.

Also, Mendy is Bute's mandatory, so while the bout my be a disgrace, Bute has to take it.

My Top 5 at SMW

1. Froch (could be Ward)
2. Ward (could be Froch)
3. Kessler
4. Bute
5. Stieglitz

Why not vacate?

Mendy isn't in the top 20 at super middle, Groves/DeGale would batter him.

Glyn Leach wrote:Bute was No. 1 before the start of Super Six and has benefited from not being involved - no one has fought and beat him. Unlike other ratings, ours are based on results — fighters have to beat the fighter above them etc, and generally move down after a loss etc. Opinions don't come into it. I don't like opinion-based ratings. I want readers to always know that BM's ratings are based on results, facts, not how we feel when we wake up in the morning, like with the sanctioning bodies etc.

But my own view is Ward, Kessler, Froch, Bute in that order also.

Having a results based system is the right way to go.

But the #1 position shouldn't be set in stone - both Froch and Ward (and Kessler actually) have defeated far superior fighters than Bute has been facing..... Ward is unbeaten in that time too.

It's similar to Vitali being ranked #1 at HW despite having a relatively weak run of opponents since his comeback. Wlad dominated Chagaev, and will dominate Haye tomorrow. What will be the outcome then?

Strong argument for the S6 winner to displace Bute, even given BM's stance

If you know your history you'll know about Ring's ratings, which are a classic case of the faulty discretionary/results-based hybrid.

Glyn, if your number 1 refuses to fight the number 2 then the number 1 will always remain number 1, even if they stay fighting opponents outside of the top 10.