BoxRec

OK, this isn't a thread denegrating McPhilbin's great night...but he is obviously a 'surprise' champion and I would be surprised if he keeps it past his first defence. It can however, never be taken away and those scenes were wonderful...

So who is the worst British champ you have ever seen???

Mike Deveney (I think his name was) - British Featherweight champ of the mid 90's - lost every round to Jon Jo Irwin.

Jamie McKeever was a trier, but not the greatest technically.

However, most boxers, indeed most men, would love to have enough skill to win the British title. So respect to all the champions.

I'd give my right ball to be called the worst British Champion.

Leon Williams or Mike Holden. Stu's shouts are excellent though.

Old bones Ian wrote:Is give my right ball to be called the worst British Champion.

same here. nuff said.

Yes I agree- deveney was a good solid fighter , mckeever a right handful ,woolcombe a talented lad- there aren't many poor British champions ...

Mike Holden was incredibly mentally fragile for a British champion, i remember him complaining to his corner in one fight that he had overtained.

The British super-featherweieght title was like a merry go round in the late 80's/early 90's,with some really poor statistical records belonging to the champs(Sugar Gibiliru and Najib Daho spring to mind), the difference is between Shane,Leon and the aforementioned duo is that these guys had quality in depth on their records and could also really fight despite the losses.If FUNSO BANJO had have beat Currie he would've been worst champ ever!

Ben Carey wrote:Leon Williams or Mike Holden. Stu's shouts are excellent though.

you echoed my thoughts ref holden ben, see other thread.

Keith Knox was very fortunate to be able to call himself a British champion - although might be karma for his fight against Cantwell, when most (maybe all except for one guy - Micky Vann) thought Knox won the fight.

However, against Kelly he was getting dominated every round.... Kelly got a cut (from a head clash if I am not mistaken) - Knox wins by stoppage.

It could be argued that Paul Williams was lucky to get his British title win.... but his performances since then have shown he is very much in the same class as Chris Edwards and Shinny Bayaar.

jake the snake wrote:Matthew Barney 's got to be up there never seen him in a good fight.

i doubt he has even had a good spar!! ....

Barney was certainly in the Rob Norton school of champion.... although Barney wasn't exciting, he was effective - deservedly beat Oakey at Light Heavyweight and was robbed against Ulrich for the EBU title.

mercman wrote:

manno wrote:The British super-featherweieght title was like a merry go round in the late 80's/early 90's,with some really poor statistical records belonging to the champs(Sugar Gibiliru and Najib Daho spring to mind), the difference is between Shane,Leon and the aforementioned duo is that these guys had quality in depth on their records and could also really fight despite the losses.If FUNSO BANJO had have beat Currie he would've been worst champ ever!

Funso banjo was negative and frustrating (a bit like Joe Bugner) but he had more talent than you give him credit for. I would say that Banjo had more ability than some guys who did actually win the title - Michael Holden, for example.

By the way, I remember Banjo's British title fight with Currie, it was a real bore. Twelve rounds of mauling. There was more action outside the ring that night than inside with fighting between rival gangs of Africans and Jamaicans.

Yeh,i know what your saying, he did have some decent wins on his record and the comparison with Bugner is spot on Probably the Currie fight overly scarred me as an impressionable youngster

As heavies go its got to be Mike Holden. Won a razor thin decision over a fat, depressed Julius Francis who otherwise beat him twice. Very paraonoid, injury prone and mentally weak guy.

Worst British champ of the last 30 years. What a sh1t thread. Let's have a pop at boxers who've achieved something we can only dream of. Thread starter biggest chomp on this forum (I know your a pro boxer, don't know which one, but did/will you win a British title?)

As I said in the OP...it is all about guys who over-achieved???

I agree boxing needs these good luck stories!! But we all have guys we think 'my god, how did you win that British title'

That doesn't mean they aren't respected, as any other guys who step in the ring.

I hope that clears up any confusion

Gary Woolcombe has to be up there.....

All the fighters had their good nights, or they wouldn't have been elevated to the lofty levels they reached. Big respect for them all for achieving what was a dream come true for most of them.

I don't see a problem with the thread, though a more ''sympathetic'' title would have been ''most limited....''.

I think both Williams and McPhilbin are good shouts, as is Woolcombe. Didn't rate him much at all.

It goes without saying that they've achieved more in boxing than me (or most of us on here) but I don't see a problem with debating them or their abilities. People are happy to say David Cameron is crap or that the police are too soft etc etc, they're seemingly fair game though.

I don't object to the thread at all. I just wouldn't want to pick one person to be the worst, not with so many variables at stake i.e. relative oppostion, the fights mental state at the time, how he was living the life etc. Still interested to hear the opinion of others on it though.

LeedsLad wrote:I don't see a problem with the thread, though a more ''sympathetic'' title would have been ''most limited....''.

I think both Williams and McPhilbin are good shouts, as is Woolcombe. Didn't rate him much at all.

It goes without saying that they've achieved more in boxing than me (or most of us on here) but I don't see a problem with debating them or their abilities. People are happy to say David Cameron is crap or that the police are too soft etc etc, they're seemingly fair game though.

Boxers arent as fair game as you think pal , as ive found out on here before .

damianhucker1 wrote: Boxers arent as fair game as you think pal , as ive found out on here before .

What on earth is that supposed to mean?

Andy Bell...............

to be fair to mike holden he grabbed an opportunity when it came his way and beat julius francis.
He was incredibly fit,always running so when he got the chance, he didnt have to turn it down because he wasnt ready, like alot of fighters have had to do.
he also ko'd israel ajose and a finnish heavyweight who were both unbeaten at the time.
IM0 his biggest mistake was relinquishing the British Title after he'd won it, he is actually the undefeated British Champion, he'd of made alot more money making a defence be it voluntary or mandatory, rather than handing the title back like he did for nothing, i dont know why he did that, threw away alot of cash and the chance to build his profile

It was around the time that SKY seemingly wouldn't televise a fight without some sort of meaningless inter-continental title on the line. Williams was on a decent run of form then and I think the mandatory for the title?

Moot anyway, Holden lost the rematch to Francis in his next fight and ironically enough probably got more [TV] money for his noddy wbo fight than defending his British title.