British Fighters' World Rankings

Using the fairly decent TBRB ratings, here are where the Brits rank (forgetting the ABC belts). Offers a slightly different perspective on where we are in the world currently:

Heavyweight

Champion: Tyson Fury
8. Anthony Joshua

Cruiserweight

6. Ola Afolabi
7. Ovill McKenzie

Super Middleweight

2. DeGale
4. George Groves

Middleweight

3. Billy Joe Saunders

Welterweight

3. Kell Brook
4. Amir Khan

Lightweight

3. Terry Flanagan

Featherweight

3. Lee Selby

Super Bantamweight

1. Carl Frampton
2. Scott Quigg

Bantamweight

4. Jamie McDonnell
10. Lee Haskins

Welterweight

3. Kell Brook
4. Amir Khan

Clearly Khan's ducking of Brook is justified...not!

Tony Bellew and Anthony Crolla not top 10 ranked?

shenglong2015 wrote:Tony Bellew and Anthony Crolla not top 10 ranked?

Nope. They haven't beaten anyone in the top ten to earn a spot.

It seems a decent list. Should AJ be ranked that highly already??

AdamT wrote:It seems a decent list. Should AJ be ranked that highly already??

Maybe, maybe not. There's not a lot of competition at heavyweight.

Yeah I was thinking that myself. Still would of thought borderline top ten would of been more suited. I guess he has blown through most of the competition and he is popular. So maybe the ranking is kind of justified.

Don't see how you can trust a set of rankings when they have someone 'top' at a weight they've never fought at and never will based on a singular win.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Don't see how you can trust a set of rankings when they have someone 'top' at a weight they've never fought at and never will based on a singular win.

Who was that?

hazharrison wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Don't see how you can trust a set of rankings when they have someone 'top' at a weight they've never fought at and never will based on a singular win.

Who was that?

Canelo @ MW.

Bradley #3 p4p also severly undermines the rankings - doesn't seem any sensible basis or logic to them, despite much of them being agreeable.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Don't see how you can trust a set of rankings when they have someone 'top' at a weight they've never fought at and never will based on a singular win.

Who was that?

Canelo @ MW.

Bradley #3 p4p also severly undermines the rankings - doesn't seem any sensible basis or logic to them, despite much of them being agreeable.

Newsflash: Canelo weight is 155. That's middleweight, where he's the lineal champ.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Don't see how you can trust a set of rankings when they have someone 'top' at a weight they've never fought at and never will based on a singular win.

Who was that?

Canelo @ MW.

Bradley #3 p4p also severly undermines the rankings - doesn't seem any sensible basis or logic to them, despite much of them being agreeable.

Here's the logic:

http://www.tbrb.org/charter/

Surprised to see Groves or Flanagan as high as they are. The talent has thinned out a bit at SMW but Groves has three losses now in the past couple of years

Agreed on Groves. Wonder if Shane will get him firing again?

hazharrison wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Don't see how you can trust a set of rankings when they have someone 'top' at a weight they've never fought at and never will based on a singular win.

Who was that?

Canelo @ MW.

Bradley #3 p4p also severly undermines the rankings - doesn't seem any sensible basis or logic to them, despite much of them being agreeable.

Newsflash: Canelo weight is 155. That's middleweight, where he's the lineal champ.

1. He's never fought an opponent at the MW limit (Canelo can weigh what he wants, but a legitimate MW win is against a MW who fights at whatever weight he wants up to the MW limit)
2. He's been pretty categorical that he never will defend/fight anyone at the MW limit
3. He's only had one '160' fight (at 155) therefore has absolutely no CV at the weight.

Lineal is utter BS, as Dave has pointed out on the other thread. Canelo has no legitmacy at MW, a joke to suggest otherwise.

hazharrison wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Don't see how you can trust a set of rankings when they have someone 'top' at a weight they've never fought at and never will based on a singular win.

Who was that?

Canelo @ MW.

Bradley #3 p4p also severly undermines the rankings - doesn't seem any sensible basis or logic to them, despite much of them being agreeable.

Here's the logic:

http://www.tbrb.org/charter/

Which demonstrates enough subjectivity in the general rankings to suggest Canelo #1 @ MW is bullcr*p. Until you get to (6) Championship policy, which is tantamount to your lineal rubbish. Two totally conflicting approaches which undermine the rankings as a whole.

And none of which explains Bradley at #3 p4p.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Don't see how you can trust a set of rankings when they have someone 'top' at a weight they've never fought at and never will based on a singular win.

Who was that?

Canelo @ MW.

Bradley #3 p4p also severly undermines the rankings - doesn't seem any sensible basis or logic to them, despite much of them being agreeable.

Newsflash: Canelo weight is 155. That's middleweight, where he's the lineal champ.

1. He's never fought an opponent at the MW limit (Canelo can weigh what he wants, but a legitimate MW win is against a MW who fights at whatever weight he wants up to the MW limit)
2. He's been pretty categorical that he never will defend/fight anyone at the MW limit
3. He's only had one '160' fight (at 155) therefore has absolutely no CV at the weight.

Lineal is utter BS, as Dave has pointed out on the other thread.  Canelo has no legitmacy at MW, a joke to suggest otherwise.

1. 155 lbs is middleweight.
2. As above
3. He beat Miguel Cotto, who was the lineal champion. At worst, that puts him in the top two of the division - that's how these things should work. Like conkers.

What a load of rubbish.

TopHat24/7 wrote:What a load of rubbish.

I agree. This 155 nonsense is hurting the sport but that's the modern game's equivalent of player power.

Canelo should fight at 160 and face Golovkin.

155 is catchweight. Not middle in my view. A fighter should be allowed to weigh 160. That is the upper limit of the weight range. Not 155. Too many weights in boxing, as it is.

Now I still count Canelo as a major player in the division. I think he is the number 2 guy. But I would like him to start fighting with the ordinary weight range, because what's to stop any of boxing's next superstars pulling of a similar stunt? Boxing has enough problems.

Just my view, not stirring or anything.

In a championship fight catchweights are a pathetic joke. It's why so little weight should be placed on Manny P's 'championship reign' at LMW - it's no more legitimate than Canelo's at MW. 1 win not at the full championship weight and never defended at the full championship weight.

I hate catchweight as well. I would agree in catchweights, if there were no titles on the line.

For example, if someone like GGG were to step up and fight a light heavy at 170? As long as there is no title, I think that is a great idea.

Too many belts and enough divisions as it stands.

Manny and Floyd were able to pull this sh1t off, now every "superstar" will try the same thing.

For the benefit of entertaining/intriguing match-ups I agree, catchweights can have a role to play.

But they have no place in championship boxing and should be lowly weighted in considering rankings.

Spot on. How many divisions are there. Is it 17 or something??