20 greatest Brits of alltime - by the Bleacher report.

First topic message reminder :

20. Duke mckenzie

19. John Conteh

18 Frank Bruno

17 Henry Cooper

14. Tommy Farr

13 Naseem Hamed

12 Lloyd Honeyghan

11 Barry Mcguigan

10 Ricky Hatton

9 Nigel Benn  

8 Chris Eubank

7 Ken Buchanan

6. Randy Turpin

5. Lennox Lewis

4. Joe Calzaghe

3. Bob Fitzsimmons

2. Ted Kid Lewis

1. Jack Boughton...................????

Honey above Hamed ??..........Bruno in a top 20  and above Mckenzie..........Benn and Eubank above Hatton ??........Mcguigan above Honey and Hamed ??

Gotta be kidding me...........Surely if Fitz is on the list he has to be NUMBER 1 !!!!!!!!!!

seanmichaels wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Who said I rate him above others for one win.....

Never said that......said Kosta is enough for mckenzie.

You did? You said you rate him higher than mackenzie for the Tzsyu fight alone?

Others implies it's plural....However I said Kosta alone...not there weren't other reasons he's higher...

Who did mckenzie beat that ranks him above Hatton ?

Whilst I am also with Tina in thinking Naz’s work has slightly more consistency would also give him the edge in the manner of his wins. Outside of the Kelley fight which was an up and down affair, his wins were usually pretty emphatic in a way I would not really say is the case with Hatton. The Urango fight was pretty horrible after the half way stage with Hatton doing more than his fair share of holding and the Collazo fight could genuinely have gone either way.

Think there is a legitimate argument there is not too much gap between their levels of opposition but think there is a marked gap between how they each handled those challengers.

Do you not think as with Azumah Nelson...that featherweights and below always get a raw deal in the rankings..

I remember an article in kO that said that superfights don't happen at lower weights........and Is that the problem..

smaller fighters aren't as popular end of ?? and suffer as a consequence..

I think it's Hamed by a good distance; better longevity, dominance, higher standard of opposition, more talent, wasn't embarrassed in his loss. All that Hatton has going for him is Tzuyu which is a win that's been elevated somewhat to ludicrous proportions.

There seems to be a myth about the Barrera fight, yes it was a comfortable win for MAB but it had large periods of competitiveness and certainly wasn't the one sided schooling some like to remember.

Hamed; Kelley, McCullough, Sanchez, Vasquez, Soto, Medina, Molina, Ingle, Robinson, Hardy, Bungu, Johnson

Hatton; Tzuyu, Urango, Maussa, Collazo, Malignaggi, Castillo, Lazcano

If all Hatton has going for him is Kosta...where does Calzaghe rate in your list ??

7th or 8th i'd say

Longevity, dominance, better wins, more talent

Hopkins, Kessler, Lacy, Reid, Woodhall, Brewer, Mitchell, Bika and Eubank, his title reign was full of crud but it contained some good fighters too.

I think skill has to come into it and that's where Hatton is let down. He was a brawler with a big heart.

seanmichaels wrote:I think skill has to come into it and that's where Hatton is let down. He was a brawler with a big heart.

Only if you're basing it on head to head as well. That is the only time that should come into it.

You could just as easily argue that Hatton should be higher for making the best of his talent which was demonstrably less natural than Hamed.

The Terror of Tylorstown wrote:7th or 8th i'd say

Longevity, dominance, better wins, more talent

Hopkins, Kessler, Lacy, Reid, Woodhall, Brewer, Mitchell, Bika and Eubank, his title reign was full of crud but it contained some good fighters too.

Hopkins had been beaten twice by Taylor................Eubank had lost twice to Collins.........Lacy is a better win than he's credited for...

The rest aren't really any better than Collazo and the like.........But I rate him higher too so I'll not argue too much........

Longevity is a misleading thing.........

Atila wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I'm american I think the French are cowardly slime........

How quickly things get forgotten. The French helped you out during the Revolutionary War*. Without their help you might never have kicked out the Brits.

*It wasn't a revolution. Big bug-bear of mine!

Beaten twice or not Hopkins at 43 was a better boxer and a more active one than Tzuyu at 36.

Pedlar Palmer would have to be fairly close to the top 15, winning two out of three against George Dixon is no mean feat.

The Terror of Tylorstown wrote:Beaten twice or not Hopkins at 43 was a better boxer and a more active one than Tzuyu at 36.

Not as highly rated though...

There is a big difference between being the p4p number 4 and the p4p number 3 after all.

Glad you agree

Quite clearly the number one would be Jimmy Wilde; The 'Ghost' with a hammer in his hand

Don't know about "quite clearly", ToT - Ted Kid Lewis is equally clearly in the argument with Wilde - lost a fair few more, I agree, but beat, and competed with, a far better standard of opposition than Jimmy. I would say that there is clear water between them and the rest. Think Rowley has it about right, although I might be inclined to find a slot for Berg at the expense, perhaps, of Conteh, who should have been a top 5 man, but entirely through his own love of the high life, would in fact be around the same 11-13 mark as Lynch and Froch for me.

Hamed would just about make my top 10 - Hatton wouldn't; indeed, I'd be forced to place Ricky below Honeyghan and Turpin as well. You then have Benn, Eubank and the ridiculously underrated Watt before trying to sort out the pecking order for men like Winstone, Andries, Boza-Edwards, Peter Kane, Hope, Barry McGuigan and Rinty Monaghan (with all the usual caveats that come with those two names), Dave Charnley, Jock McAvoy and so on.

The Bleacher list is laughable, of course, but most of their sportswriting tends to be done by people without a clue about how to put together a sentence, not to mention no idea about the history of whatever it is that they are covering.

McKenzie might make my top 40, incidentally. Bruno and Farr could sneak into a top 50. Cooper wouldn't be anywhere near that level - 60-70 on a charitable day.

I've got to stick up for my namesake though Captain.

Of those you mentioned how many would Haye rank above for instance, doesn't have a particularly strong record but unifying cruiserweight and winning a belt at heavyweight i'd have thought would rank him above Hope, Charnley and Andries.

I'm not a fan of Haye as a person, ToT, but his achievements entitle him to a place inside the top 30. I'd place him above Charnley and McAvoy, perhaps marginally ahead of Hope and Andries, roughly equal with Boza, but behind Kane and Winstone. Khan would also have an argument for the top 30, I imagine, but right at the lower end of it. Froch is easier to assess, because his achievements are basically all written. A loss now won't make too much difference to his standing. Similarly, nor would the odd win here and there - the one exception to that is Ward - in the unlikely event of Froch beating Ward in a rematch, he would have to rise to a place just outside the top 3, in my opinion.

Probably fairest to hang fire with Khan (and, to a lesser extent, Haye) until they've actually hung up the gloves.

Sorry captain but I think your views on cooper are blinded by the sun.

We were struggling a while back to find a worse 3 weight champion than duke Mckenzie and don't think we succeeded. He's one of the worst 1 weight champions so how he managed to get 3 is just one of life's little mysteries.

Iran Barkley and Koki Kameda might give Duke a run for his money as undistinguished three-weight champs, milky.

As for Henry, I'm so offended by your verdict on my opinion of him that I shan't talk to you for 25 years, and then only when dragged into a TV studio to do so.

I may be being harsh but Leo Gamez would have to be right up there as well.

Forgot that he'd achieved the three belts, ToT. A worthy addition to the list and he won't be the last, either.

I believe he took it one step further and won four belts from minimumweight up to super flyweight, hardly an achievement when that used to be on division back in the day.

Wow, 4 indeed! Minimum, light-fly, fly and super-fly!!

captain carrantuohil wrote:Iran Barkley and Koki Kameda might give Duke a run for his money as undistinguished three-weight champs, milky.

As for Henry, I'm so offended by your verdict on my opinion of him that I shan't talk to you for 25 years, and then only when dragged into a TV studio to do so.

I'll be ready for you in 25 years captain, don't nick yourself shaving on the morning or they'll stop the tv show, just when you were about to give me a good verbal hiding.

Ps Sorry for the tardy response, I cut my glove and it took me over a minute to fix it.

For which he had to gain the princely total of ten pounds, all told!

It is a bit silly, to say the least. Manos has long ridden a hobby-horse about the ludicrous spacing between the lighter weights, and quite rightly so. I'd like to see the eight original weight divisions (plus cruiser) restored, myself, but if nirvana can't be achieved, couldn't we at least thin out some of the "extra bag of flour" weights at the bottom of the scale?

It's only fair to warn you that I may be too busy embellishing my reputation on the pro-celebrity golf circuit to turn up for our 2038 meeting, milky. You may have to be satisfied with DVDs of my performance in Royal Flash plus innumerable rancid advertisements of a rancid product instead.

captain carrantuohil wrote:our 2038 meeting, milky.

Are you really going to be up for anything at 95 years old, Captain?

Christ, our 'Enry's getting a bit of a kicking today!

Next you'll be saying that his knighthood was a bit silly because his boxing career wasn't actually any better than a shed load of other Brits who had better careers themselves at this rate.....

You're so sharp you need to be careful you don't cut yourself, Tino. Not unlike 'Enry, as it happens.

88Chris05 wrote:Christ, our 'Enry's getting a bit of a kicking today!

Next you'll be saying that his knighthood was a bit silly because his boxing career wasn't actually any better than a shed load of other Brits who had better careers themselves at this rate.....

Never sure why people get knighted in sport..........They make shed loads of money...Do it for personal glory and then get knighted for services to their Country..

BS.........

captain carrantuohil wrote: You may have to be satisfied with DVDs of my performance in Royal Flash plus innumerable rancid advertisements of a rancid product instead.

I struggle to forgive anyone who was involved in that horrific butchering of Macdonald Frasiers peerless works.

Wasn't the K bestowed for being a grand water rat or whatever the hell they're called? Like Brucie, Tarby, Lynchie, Rolfie and all the other demi-gods of the 60s and 70s? If not, beats me how Chic Calderwood and Billy Walker didn't pick up gongs as well.

Ain't that the truth, Rowley? I was re-reading "Flashman & The Dragon" only the other day, as it happens. Still makes the ribs ache - anyone who wants an insight into the Chinese mentality in this day and age might find it instructive, not to say vastly irreverent and howlingly funny as well.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

captain carrantuohil wrote:our 2038 meeting, milky.

Are you really going to be up for anything at 95 years old, Captain?

he'll probably be more virrile than milkyboy as the latter was named by his wife with a dose of irony. She wanted to call him little john but that would give a false impression to robin hood fans.

May have to revisit the Flashman series again, the mention of his is making me miss the old bounder. Perhaps the greatest anti hero in literature.

Hello shah, thanks for your contribution.

captain carrantuohil wrote:Wasn't the K bestowed for being a grand water rat or whatever the hell they're called? Like Brucie, Tarby, Lynchie, Rolfie and all the other demi-gods of the 60s and 70s? If not, beats me how Chic Calderwood and Billy Walker didn't pick up gongs as well.

Personally I think appearing on question of sport, brut ads and having a terrible golf swing, are all justifiable reasons to have a knighthood stripped. I can hear the complaints now though... 'How can you take the man's title like that'.

Did you know that Flashman was somehow at the Johnson-Burns fight in Sydney in 1908, Jeff? He offers a pretty caustic opinion on Johnson in both "F and the Angel of the Lord" and "Mr American" (Flashman plays a cameo role in the latter novel).

Sorry mate. Haven't hads day off in two months. Am runningon fumes ands can can contribute nothing but crap jokes. Though some would claim not to notice. The difference

captain carrantuohil wrote:Did you know that Flashman was somehow at the Johnson-Burns fight in Sydney in 1908, Jeff? He offers a pretty caustic opinion on Johnson in both "F and the Angel of the Lord" and "Mr American" (Flashman plays a cameo role in the latter novel).

I did see that in one of the books. I actually read Frasier's notes at the back when it related to Johnson, he mentions that many consider Johnson was the best fighter ever! I nearly stopped reading them at that point. May be the memory playing tricks but believe he makes reference to being at Corbett Sullivan at some point as well.

ShahenshahG wrote:Sorry mate.  Haven't hads day off in two months. Am runningon fumes ands can can contribute nothing but crap jokes. Though some would claim not to notice. The difference

About the level of my own contributions fella... I just lack the excuse

milkyboy wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:Sorry mate.  Haven't hads day off in two months. Am runningon fumes ands can can contribute nothing but crap jokes. Though some would claim not to notice. The difference

About the level of my own contributions fella... I just lack the excuse

I'm singing kum bah yah... 

I'll chip in on the Hatton v Hamed debate to say having compared their records, with a few of the posters from this thread, a couple of years ago it was fairly conclusive that Hamed has the better record.

captain carrantuohil wrote:Don't know about "quite clearly", ToT - Ted Kid Lewis is equally clearly in the argument with Wilde - lost a fair few more, I agree, but beat, and competed with, a far better standard of opposition than Jimmy. I would say that there is clear water between them and the rest. Think Rowley has it about right, although I might be inclined to find a slot for Berg at the expense, perhaps, of Conteh, who should have been a top 5 man, but entirely through his own love of the high life, would in fact be around the same 11-13 mark as Lynch and Froch for me.

Hamed would just about make my top 10 - Hatton wouldn't; indeed, I'd be forced to place Ricky below Honeyghan and Turpin as well. You then have Benn, Eubank and the ridiculously underrated Watt before trying to sort out the pecking order for men like Winstone, Andries, Boza-Edwards, Peter Kane, Hope, Barry McGuigan and Rinty Monaghan (with all the usual caveats that come with those two names), Dave Charnley, Jock McAvoy and so on.

The Bleacher list is laughable, of course, but most of their sportswriting tends to be done by people without a clue about how to put together a sentence, not to mention no idea about the history of whatever it is that they are covering.

What's with the Wilde bashing captain?


This is the man who rates Khan higher than David Haye on the current British rankings.


Sorry captain, can't take a word of your ill thought-out and bias posting seriously since that little gem.



Best fighter he ever saw according to Gene Tunney and he lived through the Golden Age of Boxing. He would have seen them all.

Looks like youve been dumped Chris

If you'd bothered to read what I wrote, you'd see that I have Haye above Khan at the moment. Wilde-bashing - well, yes, if you think ranking him at 2, a distance clear of the best of the rest of the UK is bashing him, guilty as charged.

Now f*** off back to Toytown.

The word is "biased", when you're using it as an adjective (or as part of a verb), by the way. Bias is a substantive, much unlike a lot of what you bother to write. And yes, before you resort to your usual idiocy, I would say that to your face.