BoxRec

http://boxrec.com/ratings.php?country=U ... &SUBMIT=Go

can anyone explain to me how ricky burns, a 2 wieght world champion, unbeaten in 6 title fights finds himself behind:
kell brook, a man who is about to fight his first world title eliminator
david haye, a man who is retired (ok, he came out of retirement to fight an unlicensed fight).
and most importantly
tyson f**king fury, a nugget that ducked a brittish title fight to fight a 40 year old for his irish title.

david haye i'll give them as, if you take away the fact that he's acted like a prize plum recently and is an unlicense fighter,
he is still a 2 wieght world champion.
although you could point to ricky being above him by merit of still being a world champion, being undefeated in world title fights.
you could also point back to david having unified a division

but c'mon boxrec. brook and fury can't possibly be above him,

a mars bar an a can of coke to the first man who can provide a convincing argument for either

I agree fury shouldn't be there, but brook is more talented, undefeated and fought higher ranked fighters then burns !

davie wrote: can anyone explain to me how ricky burns, a 2 wieght world champion, unbeaten in 6 title fights finds himself behind..

http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=28051

De gale above George groves WHAT !!!!

You need to understand how these rankings work.
It's a complex points system driven by the computer, based on the information in the results / schedule section of boxrec.
Never seen a rankings system that works perfectly to be honest - and that includes this one.
Click on the "explanation" button for full details how it works.

wesley05 wrote:De gale above George groves WHAT !!!!

Fought and defended Euro title, whereas all Groves has done is beat Paul Smith it's right to have him above

Camcas wrote:

wesley05 wrote:De gale above George groves WHAT !!!!

Fought and defended Euro title, whereas all Groves has done is beat Paul Smith it's right to have him above

Yes but also beat chunky quit easily IMO surly you lose ranking points for a loss

Groves hasn't done anything since though, with the exception of the win over Smith.

DeGale had beaten a tough opponent to win the European and then went abroad to defend it, which he did in style.

wesley05 wrote:

Camcas wrote:

wesley05 wrote:De gale above George groves WHAT !!!!

Fought and defended Euro title, whereas all Groves has done is beat Paul Smith it's right to have him above

Yes but also beat chunky quit easily IMO surly you lose ranking points for a loss

Its wasn't easily at all it was a fight that could have gone either way and yes after Groves loss Degale would have been below, but his two recent wins put him above that

jessi wrote:I agree fury shouldn't be there, but brook is more talented, undefeated and fought higher ranked fighters then burns !

With the fullest of respect to Brook how can you say hes fought better people than Ricky you clown,Ricky fought the ring mag No1 in Martinez,Katsitas ex Interim champ and Moses ex Champion. Kell hasnt fought anyone in top 15 yet as far as im aware

billy nelson wrote:

jessi wrote:I agree fury shouldn't be there, but brook is more talented, undefeated and fought higher ranked fighters then burns !

With the fullest of respect to Brook how can you say hes fought better people than Ricky you clown,Ricky fought the ring mag No1 in Martinez,Katsitas ex Interim champ and Moses ex Champion. Kell hasnt fought anyone in top 15 yet as far as im aware

pretty much what i was thinking when i read that

brook is no doubt talented and will be a world champion one day and may perhaps go on to be rightfully higher ranked than ricky or other current brittish title holders,
but, as far as i see it, until you've fought and won at a higher level, you cannot be ranked higher on any repectable rankings system.

and kell brook has not, not even nearly!

davie wrote:http://boxrec.com/ratings.php?country=U ... &SUBMIT=Go

can anyone explain to me how ricky burns, a 2 wieght world champion, unbeaten in 6 title fights finds himself behind:
kell brook, a man who is about to fight his first world title eliminator
david haye, a man who is retired (ok, he came out of retirement to fight an unlicensed fight).
and most importantly
tyson f**king fury, a nugget that ducked a brittish title fight to fight a 40 year old for his irish title.

david haye i'll give them as, if you take away the fact that he's acted like a prize plum recently and is an unlicense fighter,
he is still a 2 wieght world champion.
although you could point to ricky being above him by merit of still being a world champion, being undefeated in world title fights.
you could also point back to david having unified a division

but c'mon boxrec. brook and fury can't possibly be above him,

a mars bar an a can of coke to the first man who can provide a convincing argument for either

Nobody goes by these ratings on here, we prefer to wait until 00:01 on the first of every month for the official list

davie wrote:

billy nelson wrote:

jessi wrote:I agree fury shouldn't be there, but brook is more talented, undefeated and fought higher ranked fighters then burns !

With the fullest of respect to Brook how can you say hes fought better people than Ricky you clown,Ricky fought the ring mag No1 in Martinez,Katsitas ex Interim champ and Moses ex Champion. Kell hasnt fought anyone in top 15 yet as far as im aware

pretty much what i was thinking when i read that

brook is no doubt talented and will be a world champion one day and may perhaps go on to be rightfully higher ranked than ricky or other current brittish title holders,
but, as far as i see it, until you've fought and won at a higher level, you cannot be ranked higher on any repectable rankings system.

and kell brook has not, not even nearly!

I think Kells class when going forward and hope he does go on to win a world title soon

Nobody goes by these ratings on here, we prefer to wait until 00:01 on the first of every month for the official list

where do you come by these?
The official ratings, whos official ratings? ring/wba/wbc/ibf/wbo?

davie wrote:

Nobody goes by these ratings on here, we prefer to wait until 00:01 on the first of every month for the official list

where do you come by these?
The official ratings, whos official ratings? ring/wba/wbc/ibf/wbo?

Its Horse's! And then we all argue for a week with him!

mickey1975 wrote:

davie wrote:

Nobody goes by these ratings on here, we prefer to wait until 00:01 on the first of every month for the official list

where do you come by these?
The official ratings, whos official ratings? ring/wba/wbc/ibf/wbo?

Its Horse's! And then we all argue for a week with him!

horse's?

you've lost me, give us a link

davie wrote:horse's?

you've lost me, give us a link

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=152838