BoxRec

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

11. (11.) Kell Brook
12. (12.) Rendall Munroe
13. (13.) Matthew Hatton
14. (14.) Ola Afolabi
15. (15.) Ryan Rhodes
16. (16.) George Groves
17. (17.) Darren Barker
18. (18.) Paul McCloskey (Irish)
19. (RE.) Lee Selby
20. (NE.) Martin Murray

21. (19.) Tyson Fury
22. (20.) John Murray
23. (21.) Gavin Rees
24. (23.) James DeGale
25. (24.) Ajose Olusegun
26. (RE.) Dereck Chisora
27. (25.) Anthony Crolla
28. (NE.) Chris Edwards
29. (26.) Tony Bellew
30. (27.) Scott Quigg

Out - (28.) Colin Lynes
Out - (22.) John Simpson
Out - (29.) Ashley Theophane
Out - (30.) Gary Buckland

Any comments, criticisms or P4P lists are very welcome.

Horse wrote:Any comments, criticisms or P4P lists are very welcome.

How can Khan be above Burns ??

Also, how come David Haye is still in the rankings, let alone at no.4 !!

Martin Murray should be higher

Quixall wrote:

Horse wrote:Any comments, criticisms or P4P lists are very welcome.

How can Khan be above Burns ??

Also, how come David Haye is still in the rankings, let alone at no.4 !!

Because he's defeated better opposition and his last loss was extremely controversial?

It's a pretty good list as always horse, although it always confuses me to see Andy lee ranked not only above Darren barker but 7 places higher. I know a loss is a loss but surely barkers last performance must count for something, you still have macklin right up there ?

Macklin is too high and doesn't deserve that ranking. Burns should be ahead of Khan aswell

crusader wrote:

Quixall wrote:

Horse wrote:Any comments, criticisms or P4P lists are very welcome.

How can Khan be above Burns ??

Also, how come David Haye is still in the rankings, let alone at no.4 !!

Because he's defeated better opposition and his last loss was extremely controversial?

That could well be why Crusader, but for me however contraversial that fight was, Khan still lost and has no status as a current world champion, where as Burns does. As for opposition, Khan has fought better fighters, but his best fight to date name wise is Maidana, because both Judah and Malignaggi were at least five years off their prime years when Khan fought them.

Quixall wrote:How can Khan be above Burns ??

Khan has a better record than Burns and his recent loss was to a world class opponent in controversial circumstances. If Burns picks up another win like his Martinez or Katsidis wins then he might overtake Khan.

Quixall wrote:Also, how come David Haye is still in the rankings, let alone at no.4 !!

Haye has only been inactive for 6 months and I think 4th place is the best spot for him.

Horse wrote:

Quixall wrote:How can Khan be above Burns ??

Khan has a better record than Burns and his recent loss was to a world class opponent in controversial circumstances. If Burns picks up another win like his Martinez or Katsidis wins then he might overtake Khan.

Quixall wrote:Also, how come David Haye is still in the rankings, let alone at no.4 !!

Haye has only been inactive for 6 months and I think 4th place is the best spot for him.

Fair comments Horse, i just think that Burns shaded it with his performance against Katsidis which was as equal in my eyes to Khan's victories over Judah and Malignaggi. As for David Haye, i know he has only been inactive for a few months, but i would have thought that he would drop from the rankings due to his retirement.

Chris W 1982 wrote:Martin Murray should be higher

I don't like to raise fighters too high after a loss even if it is a controversial loss.

Horse wrote:

Chris W 1982 wrote:Martin Murray should be higher

I don't like to raise fighters too high after a loss even if it is a controversial loss.

He did draw though.

Nice one for the list horse.

Dan Dares wrote:

Horse wrote:

Chris W 1982 wrote:Martin Murray should be higher

I don't like to raise fighters too high after a loss even if it is a controversial loss.

He did draw though.

Nice one for the list horse.

Your Right Dan

Camcas wrote:Macklin is too high and does
n't deserve that ranking. Burns should be ahead of Khan aswell

Totally agree!!! Way to high, we will see how good he is if Martinez comes off

jessi wrote:It's a pretty good list as always horse, although it always confuses me to see Andy lee ranked not only above Darren barker but 7 places higher. I know a loss is a loss but surely barkers last performance must count for something, you still have macklin right up there ?

Barker's performance against Martinez was good but he still got knocked out. I think Lee has a significantly better record as far as wins go.

Barker has only had 2 wins in the last 2 years, whereas Lee has had 7. If Barker had been more active then, even with the loss to Martinez, he would quite likely now be higher than Lee.

Agree with what has been said about Martin Murray and I always wonder why Rendall Munroe is always so high in British P4P lists. The BBC have him in the top 10...although I don't really take much notice of theirs.

I think an objective list would surely have to have Murray above Macklin now, given Murray drew with Sturm and Macklin lost to Sturm (officially).


Top 3 must be very close now. Burns with a solid win, Khan with a tad controvesial loss and Froch with a lopsided loss albeit against the #1 fighter in the devision. I think a case could be made for any one of the 3 being #1.

Quixall wrote:

crusader wrote:

Quixall wrote: How can Khan be above Burns ??

Also, how come David Haye is still in the rankings, let alone at no.4 !!

Because he's defeated better opposition and his last loss was extremely controversial?

That could well be why Crusader, but for me however contraversial that fight was, Khan still lost and has no status as a current world champion, where as Burns does. As for opposition, Khan has fought better fighters, but his best fight to date name wise is Maidana, because both Judah and Malignaggi were at least five years off their prime years when Khan fought them.

If it comes down to status as a world champ, then Brian Magee should be up with Burns as he also holds an Interim World Title. The sooner us supposedly knowledgeable fans stop recognising farcical belts and phantom world titlists, the better boxing will be. Burns is a fine fighter and deserves to be ranked highly after his wins over Martinez and Katsidis. He should not be recognised as a world champion though. Our favourite Sun Columnist wrote on this subject at the weekend:

I'm hoping to hear some good news soon that Juan Manuel Marquez has vacated the WBO world lightweight title so that Scotland's Burns, the interim champion, will be elevated to full world champion status.

Lordy - so the boxers own promoter publicly wishes that the genuine title holder vacates so his man can be given a free pass?

Camcas wrote:Macklin is too high and doesn't deserve that ranking.

Who else deserves to be ahead of him?

Macklin hasn't had an official win in over a year, so he will start to fall down the rankings if he doesn't have a fight soon.

Camcas wrote:Burns should be ahead of Khan aswell

Burns win against Katsidis was good and I moved him above Haye and Cleverly because of that win. However I don't think his record is quite good enough for him to overtake Khan or Froch yet.

Quixall wrote:Fair comments Horse, i just think that Burns shaded it with his performance against Katsidis which was as equal in my eyes to Khan's victories over Judah and Malignaggi.

Yes, I would say that his win over Katsidis was about equal with those two Khan victories. Khan has more of those sorts of wins on his record than Burns does at the moment, which is why I still have Khan above Burns.

Quixall wrote:As for David Haye, i know he has only been inactive for a few months, but i would have thought that he would drop from the rankings due to his retirement.

Isn't he interested in a Vitali fight? I don't really consider him retired yet.

Horse wrote:

Camcas wrote:Macklin is too high and doesn't deserve that ranking.

Who else deserves to be ahead of him?

Macklin hasn't had an official win in over a year, so he will start to fall down the rankings if he doesn't have a fight soon.
Magee, Lee, McDonnell, Brook, Mitchell, Afolabi, Murray, maybe Chisora

Camcas wrote:Burns should be ahead of Khan aswell

Burns win against Katsidis was good and I moved him above Haye and Cleverly because of that win. However I don't think his record is quite good enough for him to overtake Khan or Froch yet.

Agreed it is close although i think a win over Katsidis should move him just ahead can understand why it wouldnt though

Dan Dares wrote:

Horse wrote:

Chris W 1982 wrote:Martin Murray should be higher

I don't like to raise fighters too high after a loss even if it is a controversial loss.

He did draw though.

Nice one for the list horse.

Oh yeah, the same applies to draws though.

Tko1980 wrote:

Camcas wrote:Macklin is too high and does
n't deserve that ranking. Burns should be ahead of Khan aswell

Totally agree!!! Way to high, we will see how good he is if Martinez comes off

Come on, he isn't way too high. Only a few fighters have a good case for being higher than Macklin.

milpool wrote:Agree with what has been said about Martin Murray and I always wonder why Rendall Munroe is always so high in British P4P lists. The BBC have him in the top 10...although I don't really take much notice of theirs.

Munroe was a good European champion with some good wins, he challenged for the WBC title and has beaten two okay fighters since then. I think he is roughly where he belongs at the moment.

Haye at 4,your having a laugh,he was embarrassing last time out--should be 14!!!
Macklin too high!!!