BoxRec

Scott Harrison.
Paul Ingle.
Micheal Brodie.
Paul Hodkinson.
Colin McMillian.

They are all UK fighters who held 'world titles' at Featherweight but who if they could have fought each other in their primes would have come out on top?

I would be interested in yout thoughts.

Hmm, not an easy one this is it?

I recall Ingle-McMillan. What a fight that was.

These men were all hard luck cases, weren't they? Though obviously Harrison undid his own career.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Hmm, not an easy one this is it?

Indeed, I was watching some old Hoko fights last night and it got me thinking, hence this thread.

A tough one IMO.

Very tricky. All world class, all very beatable.

I'd stick my neck out and maybe say that at their respective peaks Hodkinson or Harrison is the best but even then selecting their peak night is tricky...

I'd probably stick Macmillan at the bottom of the pile, more going by his record than anything, although he promised much and looked great winning the title he ultimately lost all his world level fights.

I can visualise Harrison beating them all if that helps!

Yes it is a difficult one.

I think I would edge towards Brodie, purely because he could box and then give as good as he gets in open warfare.

Hodkinson at his peak was really really good though.

That's just Manc bias. The 'Yorkshire Hunter' would rip 'em all a new one!

Granted McMillan was a bit past it, but Ingle-McMillan was a great fight between a former world titlist and a future one.

Twinkle Toes wrote:Hodkinson at his peak was really really good though.

True and he was my initial pick as the No.1 for this list, but Hoko did bust up a lot around of the eyes and then I thought of the hammering Harrison gave The Pocket Rocket and wondered would Hokos eyes stand up to that?

Tough one for one reason or another you could say 3 of them didn't fulfill their potential or reach their peak (well certainly two). I think had all reached had an equal chance to grow and reach their peak it would be IMO.

1. McMillan
2. Ingle.
3. Hodkinson
4. Brodie
5. Harrison.

Real good question. McMillan was never the same after his injury. His performance against Robinson was much better than Hokko (and Hokko was at a similar stage in his career - somewhat shell shocked).

I think each fight would be equally matched and all 50:50. I would like Harrison over Brodie, but Ingle over Harrison.... Then I think Brodie would beat Ingle etc etc.

Steve Robinson beats them all, best not mentioned that other world champion from that era though!

Terence wrote:

viciousmaussa wrote:That's just Manc bias. The 'Yorkshire Hunter' would rip 'em all a new one!

He is still a legend in these parts, no bias though, great skills. If he was strong at the weight and boxed it clever he could win a fight with those names.

Quality round-robin though!

Definitely more of a super bantam. You could tell Harrison and Chi were too big.

Brodie, for me, was in 2 of the best ever fights in a British ring. The Briitsh (or was it Commonwealth) title win over Neil Swain & the WBC draw with Chi.

Hoko/Harrison would have been down right fantastic - The Harrison that fought Chacon was a joy to watch.

Thinking on some more, that list of fighters is too difficult to seperate, I totally missed Ingle's name being in there :)

I'm already starting to change my mind on Brodie.

P.S.

I left Robinson, Hamed and McGuigan off the list as I felt they have been rated to death over the years.

Great question KOJOE, and all the better because I don't think we could find a definitive answer. I've got a soft spot for Brodie, but then I wonder if he could outlast Ingle.... And then, as Twinkle Toes says, Harrison circa Chacon looked awesome. But Hoko was a terrific fighter, as was McMillan and yes, It's hurting my head now. Such a well matched group of fighters. They'd probably all go win, loss, win, loss if they faced off against each other.

Shit, I couldn't possibly rank those 5, but I'm sure as hell trying to now. Good thread Joe.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Hmm, not an easy one this is it?

You are right, that is hard. I think every fight is a pick-em.

McMillan was probably the most talented, great natural boxer, though not as robust as some of the others.

Can anyone remember when the injury occured. He really was never the same fighter after it, was it a shoulder injury?

It was when he lost his WBO title I think, against Palacios (I did just check that).

Interestingly, does anybody know why Palcios never fought again after beating McMillan?

Palacios died at age 40, 11 years after he retired.

He had Aids at the time of the Mc Millan fight

Oh yes that rings a bell now.

Goz wrote:Oh yes that rings a bell now.

Ruben Palacios was meant to come back to the UK to defend against John Davison but it was discovered he had AIDS. Steve Robinson stood in.

From Boxrec.

Robinson, considered just a journeyman, accepted the fight at 48 hours' notice after champion Ruben Palacios, due to defend against Davison, failed an AIDS test. The WBO controversially sanctioned the contest for their vacant title and the rest, as they say, is history.

Didn't Ruben Palacios go to prison a few years later? Or is my memory playing tricks with me?

Ko joe yes he went to prison got caught with a kilo of the white powder nothing else to do to make a living so I beleive. While there he found he was Hiv negative SHIT.

I'd go
Paul Hodkinson.
Scott Harrison
Michael Brodie
Paul Ingle
Colin McMillian

Hoko at his best was a very good fighter but seemed to lose it very quickly at the end. At his peak he'd have pushed Harrison and IMO beaten him.
I rate harrison just behind him...it's easy to take a pop at Harrison these days but when he focused and trained he was a hard man to beat.

Brodie a close third - good all round fighter who didn't always get the cards falling right. Ingle - not quite so good IMO, but a hard guy to beat. McMillan - never really rated Colin that highly, always seemed a bit vuinerable to me, and without the ability to end a fight explosively.

just my opinion....J

john2345 wrote:I'd go
Paul Hodkinson.
Scott Harrison
Michael Brodie
Paul Ingle
Colin McMillian

Hoko at his best was a very good fighter but seemed to lose it very quickly at the end. At his peak he'd have pushed Harrison and IMO beaten him.
I rate harrison just behind him...it's easy to take a pop at Harrison these days but when he focused and trained he was a hard man to beat.

Brodie a close third - good all round fighter who didn't always get the cards falling right. Ingle - not quite so good IMO, but a hard guy to beat. McMillan - never really rated Colin that highly, always seemed a bit vuinerable to me, and without the ability to end a fight explosively.

just my opinion....J

Personally, think although what you say about having a pop at Harrison is correct I don't think he had the variety, or even punch output to deal with Ingle. Inlge might not have been a big one punch KO artist, but he still was quite spiteful (especially to the body) and he would have thrown more punches than Harrison would have dealt with.

Remember, he beat a younger, fresher Medina better than Harrison did in 2 attempts.

What you say about sweet C could be correct, unfortunately we never found out. I think there is a reason why Colin didn't have the ability to end the fight explosively - thats the shoulder injury. I think judging McMillan post Palacio and he'd have to be bottom of the pile - before that though he looked a bit special.

Before the shoulder went Mc Millan was improving all the time after his oral perception was altered. I thought coming back and winning the British Title with a shoulder that was completely fucked showed courage and adaptability.

I'd go with the rock solid Harrison to grind out a win somehow


Paul Hodkinson - body punches would give him a great chance, but he was carefuly matched overall, nearly came a cropper in his world title eliminator as well. Busted up easily though.

Michael Brodie - Harrison bigger & stronger
Paul Ingle - ditto
Colin McMillian - too fragile.