The only genuinely great British fighters of the last 30 years !!

First topic message reminder :

Lennox Lewis
Joe Calzaghe
Naseem Hamed
Ricky Hatton
David Haye..............

These are the only guys who will leave a lasting legacy on the sport in World terms.........In my opinion as humble as it is........Each of the above apart from leaving legacies have been involved in superfights...........at one time or another..

It's a valid list and debate.

My two cents have Froch ahead of Hatton.

Truss makes a great point about Hatton beating a p4p guy in Kostya but he lost brutally against the 2 active p4p'ers and i would argue that Froch was far more competitive against Ward.

Can't also forget that Hatton got a lucky decision against Collazo and had Micky Vann ref 5 fights in a row at the time he was cutting up.

Given the context of each fight I have Bute, Kessler, Pascal, Abraham, Dirrell and Taylor as better wins than Paulie, Kostya and Castillo.

Its a pretty good compare/contrast with Hatton and Froch in terms of "greatness". Froch probably has the better win column at this stage but never really became the true champion of his division. Hatton scaled the top of his division and in terms of mainstrean support, appeal and massive fights was way ahead. Neither were probably "great" fighters in terms of ability alone. Froch beat the tougher opposition in a grueling streak but Hatton transcended more and became the top man in his division for a number of years.

True Manos about Hatton being top man in his division but was he just a gatekeeper until it hotted up?

A valid question as I think Froch is in a more competitive pool of talent, even though Kessler etc might not be true greats. All about context I guess.

At his peak, I don't think Hatton would be top at 140 now whereas Froch has shown his competitiveness.

If ward went to light heavy, does froch become the man in the division... Like hatton did when mayweather and cotto moved up to welter. He probably does but its by default

This hatton being the 'man in the division' is down to the quality in the division buggering off to welterweight, leaving ricky the chance to take on the likes of maussa and urango.

Sorry tumbling, didn't see your post

Agree with yours milky, think we're on the same page here.

All about context.

I do think Urango was a pretty good win for Hatton as it happens, controlled performance and kept his head.

azania wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:The fact Lewis fought, and beat, Wlad's brother (and greatest equal in his era) will always set the two apart. However unfair that may be.

Beating his brother i snot the same as beating Wlad. Don Curry had a brother who was a world champ but oft beaten. Meaningless. I base my 'logic' on the Joe Louis logic of beating bums for eons and getting a high ranking as a result.

Bruce Curry decked a peak Benitez three times and got ripped off...........Very good fighter who had personal problems..

TumblingDice wrote:Agree with yours milky, think we're on the same page here.

All about context.

I do think Urango was a pretty good win for Hatton as it happens, controlled performance and kept his head.

He had plenty of decent performances tumbling, like you say it's the context. He wasnt chasing Harris... But maussa wins the lottery and in he dives for a unification. Urango looks awful getting his ears boxed off by Ben rabah, gets a shocking decision... in dives ricky for easy payday. Castillo moves to light welter, looks shot against ngougo, and there's a nice name on the cv.

It's easy enough to trash anyone's record retrospectively, but the gift horses kept rolling up to Ricky's stable, and he never looked any in the mouth.

Didn't lose to any ordinary stand up Europeans in his first carnation though..

In his first carnation? No he just lost embarrassingly to one at 34. Younger than the tszyu he beat, and floyd and hoppo and foreman. Should have been at the top of his game still by your argument earlier.

Don't know if he'd have lost to any stand up Europeans when he was younger, as he didn't fight any. There were too many lottery winners and senior tour pros in his diary to fit them in.

I don't think froch should be on your list truss... Just don't think hatton should be either.

What was my argument earlier...........

Randomly quoting old guys who could still fight, whilst happily ignoring old guys who were shot... Just run of the mill lazy wumming

Every fighter is different...as you well know...Hatton fought with his face...

Calzaghe didn't...........

He did truss, and so did tszyu, as you said yourself.

Seriously, I was cheering ricky on against tszyu and it was a great performance against a guy past his best but who still had some fuel in the tank... Like mcguigan pedrosa. Doesn't make ricky a great though.

To be fair to Hatton, he beat the generally considered number 1 light welter to reach the top of the division so he wasnt champion there by default. I think there is an argument to say he didnt exactly defend that position vigorously when in particular there was Cotto and Witter there as rivals. But I give Hatton some leeway because he was chasing the very best at the time.

I think the light welter division can be a bit of haven for fighters though. With day before weigh in and significant weight cutting nowadays there often isnt much differance in weights between fighters operating between lightweight to welter when you take them on the ring weight. Light welter in particular has been bypassed or only fleetingly stopped in by the top fighters - Whitaker, Mayweather, Pacquiao, Mosley, de la Hoya, JMM.

I think Hatton (and Tszyu) benefitted from this. For most of their respective reigns at lww the real quality was either side of them at lightweight or welterweight.

Wlad doesn't belong in the same sentence as Lewis.

... Best edit your post then haz, and stick a full stop in somewhere.

azania wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:The fact Lewis fought, and beat, Wlad's brother (and greatest equal in his era) will always set the two apart. However unfair that may be.

Beating his brother i snot the same as beating Wlad. Don Curry had a brother who was a world champ but oft beaten. Meaningless. I base my 'logic' on the Joe Louis logic of beating bums for eons and getting a high ranking as a result.

Except that Vit win at the tail end of Lewis' career is still better than anything on Wlad's CV and Wlad has only stepped out of big bro's shadow in the last 4-5 years, most people had Vit #1 before that and would've back him against Wlad if they ever had fought.

Add to that all the names Truss has mentioned and, unless you allow your bitterness to obscure objective judgement (nobody would be surprised, #issues), Lewis is still clearly at least a place or two ahead.

milkyboy wrote:... Best edit your post then haz, and stick a full stop in somewhere.

childish, but that did make me giggle.

milkyboy wrote:... Best edit your post then haz, and stick a full stop in somewhere.

Ha. Very good.

I rate great boxers in the same way great players are rated in football i.e. there are very few greats. If a fighter isn't all time Top 10 in their division I don't see them as great, Cruiser and SMW which have traditionally been poor divisions have produced maybe a handful of greats in total between them.

Based on the above criteria I only rate Lewis as a great from the OP list. Calzaghe could have achieved greatness based on his talent but he didn't chase the super fights.

Calzaghe is number 1 in his division...........and isn't great despite you saying they've produced a handful of greats in the SM division.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Calzaghe is number 1 in his division...........and isn't great despite you saying they've produced a handful of greats in the SM division.

Did you forget about RJJ?

SMW has always been cack..........there's only Jone Jr and that's it.

Late to this, having just returned from vacation, but it seems to me easiest to work out which fighters of the past thirty years would get into a British top 10 of all-time. Of these, Lewis is a certainty (top 3 all-time from the UK for me), and so is Calzaghe (no lower than 7 or 8).

Hamed is on or about number ten and I probably would have Froch no lower than one place below that now. After that, and looking only at the last 30 years, the only others who would make a top 20 all-time from the UK for me are, in order, Honeyghan, Hatton, Eubank and Benn (the latter two bracketed together).

I read this thread as Truss asking which of these were genuinely great by world standards. Lewis is, wherever you want to place him overall in the heavyweight rankings. Calzaghe is one of the two or three best 168 pounders in history and holds a win over a great fighter who has himself beaten a number of the top 160-175 pounders since, so I would grant him the epithet of 'great' as well. It's tougher with Naz; I'd like to term him a great and his title ledger and longevity as a linear featherweight champ does take him pretty close to that status. Very close, which probably means that he doesn't quite make it. Froch still has the chance to achieve it, but will almost certainly need to beat Ward to seal that status for himself. If he did that, I would place him no lower than fourth on the all-time UK list, and possibly higher.

winchester wrote:I would agree with the names on your list apart from Haye. Haye was good, not great. He lost to Wladimir Klitschko who I dont rate as a great by an stretch despite his fan club on here. Size played a big part but a smaller great fighter would beat Wladimir. Case in point Holyfield. You could make a case for Eubank, Benn and Collins too.

Just shut it.

You boys shouldnt play so rough. Somebody is gonna end up crying

Wait - did Holyfield beat Klitschko? I suspect Winchester is referring to Holy vs that Puluev guy, but Haye also beat Puluev, so that doesnt help Winnys argument. Which super heavyweight did Holyfield beat?

Valuev, not Puluev

Always depends how you define "great". Hard to differentiate between talent and personality.

For me, the top three are pretty safe but Hatton and Haye have to contend with Froch, Benn and Eubank.

Hatton was a great personality and his fights against Kostya and Castillo single him out but I still think the others "outrank" him.

But, the Honey man is by far the greatest in British boxing history. Not just did he beat the P4P and exceptional talent of Curry. But, he exploded the myth and riled Truss ever since... the Honeyman is number one!

Nice one Truss.

For me truss id only really consider Lewis and Calzaghe.

LiKe others have mentioned, Froch has beaten a list of big names in comparison to Haye.

Haye has beat Valuev, Ruiz, Harrison, Chisora and Barrett at Heavy and lost convincingly to the only decent operator at that weight.

Cruiser he beat some good names but nothing of legendary status.

Froch on the other hand has beaten Abraham, Johnson, Taylor, Bute etc and he overturned his narrow loss to Kessler. If he beats Ward then he is up there with Calzaghe and Lewis.

HAtton was a great household name....was always in a great scrap but was very limited in ability and was shown up at the highest level. Something Froch has not really ( apart from ward).

My own "great" list would be

Lewis
Calzaghe
Froch

My own "very good" list would be

Hatton
Haye
Hamed

Froch higher than Naz?!

Froch I think is a good shout. The SMW division has only been around for 30-years, but the current SMW crop could probably justifiably claim to be the strongest SMW top ten in history. He is #2 on that list. For me thats quite to be labelled a "Great".

Strongback wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Calzaghe is number 1 in his division...........and isn't great despite you saying they've produced a handful of greats in the SM division.

Did you forget about RJJ?

SMW has always been cack..........there's only Jone Jr and that's it.

RJJ wasn't there long enough at 168...

ShahenshahG wrote:Froch higher than Naz?!

By almost a foot.

Naz wasn't a warrior and has probably never seen a trench never mind fought in one.