BoxRec

1. (1.) Carl Froch
2. (2.) Amir Khan
3. (3.) David Haye
4. (4.) Nathan Cleverly
5. (5.) Ricky Burns
6. (6.) Matthew Macklin
7. (7.) Brian Magee (Irish)
8. (8.) Jamie McDonnell
9. (9.) Kevin Mitchell
10. (20.) Andy Lee (Irish)

11. (14.) Kell Brook
12. (10.) Rendall Munroe
13. (11.) Matthew Hatton
14. (12.) Ola Afolabi
15. (17.) Darren Barker
16. (13.) Paul McCloskey (Irish)
17. (15.) Ryan Rhodes
18. (16.) John Murray
19. (18.) Gavin Rees
20. (19.) John Simpson

21. (21.) Tyson Fury
22. (22.) George Groves
23. (RE.) James DeGale
24. (RE.) Ajose Olusegun
25. (NE.) Tony Bellew
26. (NE.) Scott Quigg
27. (23.) Ashley Theophane
28. (24.) Gary Buckland
29. (25.) Lee Selby
30. (26.) Liam Walsh

Out - (27.) Stuart Hall
Out - (28.) Stephen Smith
Out - (29.) Lee Purdy
Out - (30.) Jason Booth

Any comments, criticisms or P4P lists are very welcome.

7,8,9 & 10 are all too high.

Ola, Rhodes and Bomber are too low.

Solid list though

Why is Haye in there, he's "retired"?

Newport Daz wrote:Why is Haye in there, he's "retired"?

Dont start him off! He will be there for a few years yet. He has only just dropped Hatton!

mickey1975 wrote:

Newport Daz wrote:Why is Haye in there, he's "retired"?

Dont start him off! He will be there for a few years yet. He has only just dropped Hatton!

I thought Scott Harrison was in for a lifetime membership at one point

How you got Macklin 6 and Barker 15?

Not a criticism, just wondered your thoughts behind this?

Kell Brook is little too high and I'd have George Groves a little higher, in my opinion, but I can understand that. Otherwise a very good list, as always.

mickey1975 wrote:

Newport Daz wrote:Why is Haye in there, he's "retired"?

Dont start him off! He will be there for a few years yet. He has only just dropped Hatton!

JDC wrote:7,8,9 & 10 are all too high.

Ola, Rhodes and Bomber are too low.

Solid list though

Rhodes hasn't beaten a decent opponent for a while, so he has dropped down the rankings. Bomber lost against Cleverly, so I didn't want to enter him too high in the rankings coming of a loss.

Newport Daz wrote:Why is Haye in there, he's "retired"?

He has fought in the last 12 months and it seems like he might still be interested in a Vitali Klitschko fight.

I think barker and macklin are too far apart but im not sure at what positions they should be at after all technically Macklin and barker both lost their last fights.

Andy Lee being in the top ten (sorry Lee fans) sticks out as an error IMO. Not sure how a win over Vera warranted a 10 place rise. He should be below both Macklin and Barker IMO.

Other than that a very good list IMO.

stujones wrote:Andy Lee being in the top ten (sorry Lee fans) sticks out as an error IMO. Not sure how a win over Vera warranted a 10 place rise. He should be below both Macklin and Barker IMO.

Other than that a very good list IMO.

Firstly he is below Macklin (rightly so)

Andy Lee is in pretty much every sanctioning bodies top ten - in these days of alphabet soup politics that is no mean achievement.

Lee has beaten McEwan and Vera in a row and a string of Barkeresque opponents before that. Who exactly has Barker beaten anyway? A shop worn Spada?

Barker is, as I've been saying for eternity, massively overrated in Britain and on this forum and The inverse for Lee. Neither are world beaters but I genuinely believe that Lee knocks Barker out if they ever meet.

The case for the defence rests your honour.

slapbangwhallop wrote:

stujones wrote:Andy Lee being in the top ten (sorry Lee fans) sticks out as an error IMO. Not sure how a win over Vera warranted a 10 place rise. He should be below both Macklin and Barker IMO.

Other than that a very good list IMO.

Firstly he is below Macklin (rightly so)

Andy Lee is in pretty much every sanctioning bodies top ten - in these days of alphabet soup politics that is no mean achievement.

Lee has beaten McEwan and Vera in a row and a string of Barkeresque opponents before that. Who exactly has Barker beaten anyway? A shop worn Spada?

Barker is, as I've been saying for eternity, massively overrated in Britain and on this forum and The inverse for Lee. Neither are world beaters but I genuinely believe that Lee knocks Barker out if they ever meet.

The case for the defence rests your honour.

Well it took Sergio Martinez 11 rounds to KO a tired Barker, not sure there is anything on Lee's record to suggest he hits harder than Martinez.

It will be a good fight, I aint saying its a forgone conclusion for Barker, I just don't know how such an improven fighter like Lee can warrant a top 10 place P4P. Barker's sole defeat was a close one against one of the best fighters pound for pound, I don't need reminding who Lee's sole defeat is too. That IMO, in terms of ranking the two at least (not who will win against the two) speaks volumes.

I agree that Barker is possibly overated on the forum, thats why when he faced Martinez the realisation that he was fighting 2-3 levels ahead of his previous best opponent set in and people wrote him off. However, he fought admirably in that contest, just as his rival Macklin did in a losing effort to Sturm. Both Macklin and Barker left the contest a loser (and I do think Macklin was a few seconds from being stopped also) but both also had their reputation enhanced that they can at least be competitive at world level.

Lee aint shown that yet, not be any stretch. If come Saturday night, McEwan upsets Quinlan then I think a case could rightfully be made for a 1) Lee 2)McEwan 3)Macklin 4)Barker 5)Murray ranking (and what a juicy top 5 that would be). However, McEwan is unproven even at the equivalent of the likes of Steve Bendall's level - so for me, Spada is a more meaningful win than either McEwan and Vera - but Saturday night could change that. Spada has only lost at world level and two of his four defeats were a tad controvesial. Spada has never been KO'd early against non world class opponents.

stujones wrote:

slapbangwhallop wrote:

stujones wrote:Andy Lee being in the top ten (sorry Lee fans) sticks out as an error IMO. Not sure how a win over Vera warranted a 10 place rise. He should be below both Macklin and Barker IMO.

Other than that a very good list IMO.

Firstly he is below Macklin (rightly so)

Andy Lee is in pretty much every sanctioning bodies top ten - in these days of alphabet soup politics that is no mean achievement.

Lee has beaten McEwan and Vera in a row and a string of Barkeresque opponents before that. Who exactly has Barker beaten anyway? A shop worn Spada?

Barker is, as I've been saying for eternity, massively overrated in Britain and on this forum and The inverse for Lee. Neither are world beaters but I genuinely believe that Lee knocks Barker out if they ever meet.

The case for the defence rests your honour.

Well it took Sergio Martinez 11 rounds to KO a tired Barker, not sure there is anything on Lee's record to suggest he hits harder than Martinez.

It will be a good fight, I aint saying its a forgone conclusion for Barker, I just don't know how such an improven fighter like Lee can warrant a top 10 place P4P. Barker's sole defeat was a close one against one of the best fighters pound for pound, I don't need reminding who Lee's sole defeat is too. That IMO, in terms of ranking the two at least (not who will win against the two) speaks volumes.

I agree that Barker is possibly overated on the forum, thats why when he faced Martinez the realisation that he was fighting 2-3 levels ahead of his previous best opponent set in and people wrote him off. However, he fought admirably in that contest, just as his rival Macklin did in a losing effort to Sturm. Both Macklin and Barker left the contest a loser (and I do think Macklin was a few seconds from being stopped also) but both also had their reputation enhanced that they can at least be competitive at world level.

Lee aint shown that yet, not be any stretch. If come Saturday night, McEwan upsets Quinlan then I think a case could rightfully be made for a 1) Lee 2)McEwan 3)Macklin 4)Barker 5)Murray ranking (and what a juicy top 5 that would be). However, McEwan is unproven even at the equivalent of the likes of Steve Bendall's level - so for me, Spada is a more meaningful win than either McEwan and Vera - but Saturday night could change that. Spada has only lost at world level and two of his four defeats were a tad controvesial. Spada has never been KO'd early against non world class opponents.

Where to start.

I am at work so I will keep it brief.

McEwan = Bendall! Jeekers! Come off it, I would accuse you of having the SKY Sports blinkers on if I didnt know better.

Lee's wins over Vera and McEwan trumps Martinez knocking Barker out after holding him in so little esteem and that barely tried for 6 rounds. Harsh? Maybe! Probably just trying to bend the Sally Rod back into a neutral position.

Barker's wins have been over poor opponents, the only win of any note in his whole career was against Spada and he was shot to pieces and fed on a diet of Bulgarian turnip pickers in the three years leading up to Barker whereas McEwan had beat Brian Vera, Danny Perez and Jamie Parison who was unbeaten until that fight and is unbeaten since, and Vera had beaten Sergio Mora, Sebastian Demers and of course Andy Lee in the same period.

Horse wrote:

JDC wrote:7,8,9 & 10 are all too high.

Ola, Rhodes and Bomber are too low.

Solid list though

Rhodes hasn't beaten a decent opponent for a while, so he has dropped down the rankings. Bomber lost against Cleverly, so I didn't want to enter him too high in the rankings coming of a loss.

Rhodes form is very similar to Magee & Bellows is very similar to Cleverly (I scored them a draw btw, even if you had Cleverly winning I don't think it was by enough to have them 21 places apart)

no haskins?

slapbangwhallop wrote:

stujones wrote:

slapbangwhallop wrote: Firstly he is below Macklin (rightly so)

Andy Lee is in pretty much every sanctioning bodies top ten - in these days of alphabet soup politics that is no mean achievement.

Lee has beaten McEwan and Vera in a row and a string of Barkeresque opponents before that. Who exactly has Barker beaten anyway? A shop worn Spada?

Barker is, as I've been saying for eternity, massively overrated in Britain and on this forum and The inverse for Lee. Neither are world beaters but I genuinely believe that Lee knocks Barker out if they ever meet.

The case for the defence rests your honour.

Well it took Sergio Martinez 11 rounds to KO a tired Barker, not sure there is anything on Lee's record to suggest he hits harder than Martinez.

It will be a good fight, I aint saying its a forgone conclusion for Barker, I just don't know how such an improven fighter like Lee can warrant a top 10 place P4P. Barker's sole defeat was a close one against one of the best fighters pound for pound, I don't need reminding who Lee's sole defeat is too. That IMO, in terms of ranking the two at least (not who will win against the two) speaks volumes.

I agree that Barker is possibly overated on the forum, thats why when he faced Martinez the realisation that he was fighting 2-3 levels ahead of his previous best opponent set in and people wrote him off. However, he fought admirably in that contest, just as his rival Macklin did in a losing effort to Sturm. Both Macklin and Barker left the contest a loser (and I do think Macklin was a few seconds from being stopped also) but both also had their reputation enhanced that they can at least be competitive at world level.

Lee aint shown that yet, not be any stretch. If come Saturday night, McEwan upsets Quinlan then I think a case could rightfully be made for a 1) Lee 2)McEwan 3)Macklin 4)Barker 5)Murray ranking (and what a juicy top 5 that would be). However, McEwan is unproven even at the equivalent of the likes of Steve Bendall's level - so for me, Spada is a more meaningful win than either McEwan and Vera - but Saturday night could change that. Spada has only lost at world level and two of his four defeats were a tad controvesial. Spada has never been KO'd early against non world class opponents.

Where to start.

I am at work so I will keep it brief.

McEwan = Bendall! Jeekers! Come off it, I would accuse you of having the SKY Sports blinkers on if I didnt know better.

Lee's wins over Vera and McEwan trumps Martinez knocking Barker out after holding him in so little esteem and that barely tried for 6 rounds. Harsh? Maybe! Probably just trying to bend the Sally Rod back into a neutral position.

Barker's wins have been over poor opponents, the only win of any note in his whole career was against Spada and he was shot to pieces and fed on a diet of Bulgarian turnip pickers in the three years leading up to Barker whereas McEwan had beat Brian Vera, Danny Perez and Jamie Parison who was unbeaten until that fight and is unbeaten since, and Vera had beaten Sergio Mora, Sebastian Demers and of course Andy Lee in the same period.

I never said McEwan was the equal of Bendall, you just saw my top 5 British Middleweights, no Bendall in sight. I said McEwan hasn't fought anyone with proven pedigree of a Bendall type fight and therefore himself isn't proven. You mention those three "names" that McEwan has... Perez, thats the Welterweight right, lost everyround to Magarito many years ago and on a poor run when he fought McEwan - If it was Barker vs Perez it would be considered a bad match up (just as Barker vs Bendall would). Jamie Parison - whose he beaten? anyone with a winning record. Demers - lost everytime he has stepped up, got anhilated vs Abraham - decentish fighter, but would probably be the underdog for someone like Wayne Elcock.

You mentioned on a few occasions that the 31 year old Spada was shot years ago. No real evidence that he was though, he kept winning (and has won since) and lost against Szbik by a similar margin in the rematch as he did in fight 1. Nothing in your post convinced me that Spada would lose to any of the fighters you mentioned, or is worst than them - even this "shot" version.

You say I am pro Barker and bias, maybe I am. However, Barker two finest performances against his best opposition - honourable defeat vs Martinez and a win over Spada you have "excuses" for.

I would still rank someone with 1 defeat to Martinez and a win over Spada ahead of someone whose best result is an avenged loss vs Vera.

Cardiff-Lad1 wrote:

JDC wrote:

Horse wrote:Rhodes hasn't beaten a decent opponent for a while, so he has dropped down the rankings. Bomber lost against Cleverly, so I didn't want to enter him too high in the rankings coming of a loss.

Rhodes form is very similar to Magee & Bellows is very similar to Cleverly (I scored them a draw btw, even if you had Cleverly winning I don't think it was by enough to have them 21 places apart)

Not really sure how you can compare Cleverly and Bellew's previous form?!?! They fought and it was close but Cleverly definately won, but the level of opposition that Cleverly has faced is far greater than that of Bellew and surely this has to be taken into account when deciding the placing of the fighters??

Bellew beat British level fighters and ended up in a World title shot. Cleverly had previously cleaned up the domestic scene before moving onto European level fighters.

For example, Selby is ranked 29 and Simpson is 20. Yet Selby beat Smith, who in turn had beated Simpson twice, so does that mean that Selby should be above Simpson? Of course it doesn't.

I think this P4P list is always gonna be open to debate but i guess you have to take everything into account when placing fighters and i think its a pretty fair list.

Other than Murat Cleverlys record is as thin as Bellows imo & they've both struggled against fighters they should be blowing away.

Disagree JDC.

Brancillion was a decent EBU(ish) level fighter.

McIntosh went on to become an EBU champion in his own right.

At the moment, no fault of Tony's his best wins were against a guy sparked by Dean Francis many moons ago and Ajisafe who has won nothing as a pro.

I like the effort you put into producing the ratings, so well done on that, but Fury at #21 is just madness.

Ok, I'll concede. You wont here that very often DD

I see you actually posted this two hours before the beginning of the month. Nice one Horse.