All time Brits - Should Bellew be ranked higher than Groves ??

Easy to look at two Froch fights...and say Groves should be higher...But we don't rate fighters on defeats...If we did Pat Cowdell would rate a lot higher because I and many others had him close going in to the last round against Top 5 ATG 126er Salvador..

Based on achievements what we got..

Groves...

One slice of pie and what looks like a quality win over Eubank jr as well as a less convincing but quality win over future champ Degale....World title win was against a meh opponent but he didn't draw against the likes of Isaac Chilemba either..

Bellew...One slice of pie....1-1 with the decent Cleverly...A good win against Makumba...Two very good wins over a powerful..bigger but past it David Haye...

If you do give credence to Groves for Froch one...Bellew more than held is own for 6 rounds against a HOFer in Usyk.

Not cut and dried is it ???...Bellew's defeats Stevenson..Cleverly and Usyk are less impressive to Froch and Smith perhaps and the draw with Chilemba reminds One of Brook v Jones..

Who should rate higher ??....Guess it depends how much you rate Eubank jr ??......

Tough one...

Think I'd rate Bellew just above..

I think I'd agree with you there Truss - Groves was definitely a trier - took him 4 attempts to win himself a strap but he didn't give up. Full of promise after the DeGale scrap he shone brightly in controversial defeat in the first Froch fight, but was poleaxed in the second. A good solid SMW but nothing too special. I think he and Degale should have had a rematch for 2 belts.

Bellew loved a challenge and only came up short against Cleverly (under-prepared in my books), Stevenson (tough to beat and hard puncher) and Usyk (No shame there). He righted the draw against Chilemba and went actively after Haye when few gave him a chance. Plus he needed to feed his kids.

Forget that decision he dropped in the US and blamed on his trainer..

Not that it really makes a difference...Cleverly and Chilemba cancel that out.

Froch/Smith....Stevenson/Usyk..

Glad we agree on something...

I also like TB as a pundit. Never really warmed to him as a fighter but I like what he brings to the presenting table.

Interesting proposition Truss but I feel it would be harsh on Groves, even if his post-Froch career was a disappointment.

Can't really knock Bellew as he was one of the relatively few guys who can truly say he got one over on the sport, rather than vice versa, but boy oh boy was he carefully looked after and fortunate with timing in his career. Every single title he won - British, Commonwealth, European and eventually WBC - was vacant at the time and it says a lot about the injustices of boxing that he was able to vacate his world title, sit out the WBSS to let the best Cruisers thrash it out and still dictate terms as the A-Side against the man who came out of that series as the undisputed champion.

He and Hearn rolled the dice and took a calculated risk against Haye which was judged to perfection, to be fair. Given Haye's condition in those fights and how long it had been since he'd had a win of note I wouldn't say those wins (with some context thrown in) are really that much more creditable than Groves' over Glen Johnson, for example. Sure, Johnson was a long way past his best as well, but it was only eighteen months earlier that he'd given Froch a very decent argument (actually landed the cleaner punches, albeit couldn't match Froch's output or cut off the ring as effectively against him as he needed to) and not all that many guys had beaten him as comfortably as Groves did up until that point.

I guess we can debate whether we should give fighters many browny points for fights they lost, but if we do then I don't think Bellew-Usyk and Groves-Froch I are really like-for-like. I thought at the time that it was badly overstated how many problems Bellew had really given Usyk - after the third round it was one-way traffic in Usyk's favour and the knockout came as a surprise to nobody who'd been paying attention, regardless of whatever Smith was bleating on about in commentary. Groves on the other hand had success throughout the fight (certainly up until the seventh in any case) and at times was verging on outclassing Froch for stretches. But maybe I'm just splitting hairs on that one - they both still lost at the end of the day.

Groves' eventual world title was slightly fudged as well, I suppose, but in terms of talent I think he was a cut above Bellew and the wins against Degale and Eubank Jr have looked better as the years rolled on. He has some very decent wins against guys who were in or around their prime, whereas Bellew seemed to specialise in beating guys who were just rolling over the other side of the hill, Makabu being the exception. From 2010 to 2014 I thought Groves had the look of a potentially really top fighter, which I never felt with Bellew and I think Groves was generally more competitive at the highest level.

Like I said though, interesting proposition.

Happy for you to disagree and you make the usual compelling case..

But I can't agree with the Glen Johnson/Haye comparison..Specifically because Haye was a former Heavyweight Champion with Heavyweight power...

Sure he was past it but Bellew spent most of his career at 175...Haye at Cruiser and then Heavy..

But we see what we see and I don't have much issue with Groves higher...Picked them because they share similar trajectories..