Most Talented British Fighters 2014

How would you rank the British fighters based on talent this year?

Not this pound for pound crap, or what they have achieved over their entire careers. Just on right now who are the best boxers?

Its difficult to compile due to boxers fighting at different levels and stages.

Id go:

1. Frampton
2. Groves
3. Froch
4. Murray
5. Khan
6. Quigg
7. DeGale
8. Burns
9. Brook
10. Selby

Difficult to assess as you say mate, you have all the names , in terms of talent I'd probably make a case for Billy Joe Saunders, Frankie Gavin and Anthony Joshua. I wouldn't agree Martin Murray should be ahead of Amir Khan.

Cheers Rodders

Joshua looks good but cant form a real basis until he fights someone even approaching half decent. Certainly high hopes there though.

Striking a balance is difficult, recent form is probably most relevent and I would say Martin Murrays last few have probably trumped Khans. Murray lost a close fight against Martinez recently whereas Khan has been knocked out badly by the top guy in his division an then looked very shaky in his last fight.

I actually thought Saunders only drew his fight against Ryder and am not totally sold on Gavin yet but plenty are tipping them for big things.

Luke Campbell I would add to that mix Rodders

I would probably set a bare minimum level of having at least fought for domestic titles to qualify. Campbell has pedigree but like Joshua its just too early.

Based on talent/ability, at least a couple of the smith brothers should be included.

Would have Selby ahead of Brook, Burns and DeGale.

Paul Butler
Callum Smith
Anthony Joshua
Luke Campbell

No Billy jo Saunders on the list............

I agree with Frampton..........I'd have Saunders 2nd.............and then Groves..........

Think Degale may surprise a few people.........and the little Asian guy who appears on a lot of Hearn's bills..looks good.........The rest look are decent but not mouthwatering.

Froch and Khan are at the crossroads...

Yafai?

In terms of right now; talent, mixed with where I think they can go:

1) Frampton
2) Campbell
3) Joshua
4) Groves
5) Callum Smith
6) Quigg
7) Selby
8) Brook
9) Ogogo
10) Yafai

Few who just miss out: Hughie Fury, Frank Buglioni, Frankie Gavin, DeGale, Joe Selkirk, Terry Flanagan,

My list is purely based on talent and who goes furthest rather than any achievements hence I have left off the likes of Froch, Khan, Murray etc who I think will all retire in the next 2 years anyhow.

You not think it's too early to tell about Campbell ??

Saw Joshua in the Olympics and am not impressed..........However hope they move him on because that guy who is fighting for the title in his 2nd fight shows how pointless it is fighting stiffs..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You not think it's too early to tell about Campbell ??

Saw Joshua in the Olympics and am not impressed..........However hope they move him on because that guy who is fighting for the title in his 2nd fight shows how pointless it is fighting stiffs..

On the whole it most likely is Truss; as I said mine is more a list of who I believe to be the most talented rather than anything else. I think he will go far though obviously he may not. I just think something special about him when I watch him. Has the punch variety, great footwork and some good power. Also like his attitude, which is a big factor in how far someone with talent goes. It may be he doesn't look as good when he steps up but my gut feeling is he will do very well.

As for Joshua I think the Pro game suits him much more than the amateur format. Heavy handed, athletic, tall and rangy. Most definitely a few flaws to iron out before he makes the jump but that will come. He is young as well and not that experienced in his amateur days. Again his attitude and approach to the game seems very good & always think that if you have that then you only increase the odds of you making the most of whatever talent you have.

I think he may go far though "obviously" he may not....

Nothing like hedging bets...........

Frampton will be a world champion............Groves too............Have to see campbell and josh step up before speculating properly..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I think he may go far though "obviously" he may not....

Nothing like hedging bets...........

Frampton will be a world champion............Groves too............Have to see campbell and josh step up before speculating properly..

Yes as in my belief is that he will. I've said obviously he may not because you questioned his place in the list because he hasn't stepped up! When as I had already said...the list was MY belief of the 'MOST TALENTED' not necessarily the best!!

You mean genuine world champion truss or an IBF belt that isn't a proper belt!?   Frampton is in the same divison as Rigondeux and Groves with Ward....so by your reckoning on recent threads they will have to beat those men to actually be genuine World Champions!!

I'm not impressed with Joshua at all, a big lump who, if we wins a world title, will continue to ruin the division with the style i envisage him eventually employing. The heavy's NEED Wilder to come good........a big, athletic, limited, reckless, fast, aggressive power puncher.

3fingers - where the heck are you deriving that supposition from??

Based on nothing but my imagination, I can see him turning into a jabber and grabber, with the odd straight right thrown in for good measure.

Imagination indeed.

Baseless would also be an apt description.

AJ is as big, as athletic, as fast (he's just measured and not wild, but the man runs an 11 sec 100m ffs), and as powerful (again, his power comes from properly thrown punches not wild hayemakers).

So you think the answer to the HW division's woes is a crapper version of that because he's reckless and more likely to get caught out??

Problem is we've got two years of stiffs lined up for him......So it'll be a while before anybody knows how good he is..

Learning fights............That he'll learn nothing from..

Would back him to beat the stiff Fury's fighting next, that's for sure.

10 stiffs isn't terrible, he just needs to start fighting more durable guys who'll get him rounds. Scared he'll end up a Price.....

I like this post! Nice one catchweight.

Here's mine IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER:


Degale
Campbell
Groves
Gavin
Brook
Khan
BJ Saunders
Frampton
Callum Smith
Joshua

3fingers wrote:I'm not impressed with Joshua at all, a big lump who, if we wins a world title, will continue to ruin the division with the style i envisage him eventually employing. The heavy's NEED Wilder to come good........a big, athletic, limited, reckless, fast, aggressive power puncher.

  hmmmmm

His good at windmilling I'll give you that.

But if Dustin Nichols can put you down. I fear for him against his first live opponant.

Seanusarrilius wrote:I like this post! Nice one catchweight.

Here's mine IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER:


Degale
Campbell
Groves
Gavin
Brook
Khan
BJ Saunders
Frampton
Callum Smith
Joshua

 

Was this an after-thought after you realised you'd put JdG 'top'?

@ tophat,

basically yes, AJ's style does nothing to excite me, same with wlad. I'd would much rather watch a wild vulnerable swinger (wilder). I watch boxing to be entertained, sublime skill, awe inspiring footwork, defensive genius, brave face first plodding and/or wild vulnerable bangers......AJ just doesn't fit the bill. Big strong guy, little flair, no stand out qualities of note.

Your post is totally confusing still. I can't even understand when you switch between talking about AJ and when Wilder.

"I watch boxing to be entertained, sublime skills, awe inspiring footwork, defensive genius"........ and then you throw in "face first plodding". How can you say you want great footwork and plodders and then somewhere differentiate between Wilder & AJ?

Also, "little flair"? What does that mean? Since when did wild swinging constitute flair??

And how does "no stand out qualities" fit in when you've got a mobile (which I thought you liked) guy with an excellent jab? They not qualities??

I'm not sure your are confused? I know from reading your pieces on the old current affairs section your a bright lad. I'll explain anyway...

I said I like to be entertained, then I listed a number of attributes ranging from sublime skills to face first plodders. I was not implying the attributes should be demonstrated by a single fighter. Nor did I infer all these attributes were exhibited by Wilder and not by Joshua (other than wild vulnerable swinger, which is wildee) I was trying to highlight opposite ends of the boxing spectrum which provide me with entertainment. I like extremes, Rigo at one end and Provo at the other; next to Provo would be Wilder (the wild vulnerable swinger).

By no standout qualities when referring to Joshua.....I mean he doesn't do anything GREAT (he doesn't even do the bad stuff great, like Wilder), he's got a decent jab, hes strong, has good footwork for a heavyweight, and decent power.

By little flair I mean he's been well schooled but does not inject individual flair into his performances. It's obvious his skills have been inculcated by drill work; its testament to his dedication he's aqcuired these skills in the short time he's been boxing. I don't think Joshua has the individual flair to pull something out the bag, which he has not been trained to do.

At no point did I say Wilder had flair. I said the division needs a wild, aggressive, limited and vulnerable banger. I hope Wilder comes good, Joshua does not excite me.

Its hard to ignore potential but at the same time there is a danger in rating it too highly. Its hard to find a balance. A lot of people have Saunders high, but would you tip him to beat Murray or Macklin at the moment?

I would almost discount anyone who hasnt won a domestic title yet as being too inexperienced to be one of Britains top ten boxers at the moment. They would be in a more "best potential" list.

Think he beats Macklin.............Not sure about Murray though.

catchweight wrote:Its hard to ignore potential but at the same time there is a danger in rating it too highly. Its hard to find a balance. A lot of people have Saunders high, but would you tip him to beat Murray or Macklin at the moment?

I would almost discount anyone who hasnt won a domestic title yet as being too inexperienced to be one of Britains top ten boxers at the moment. They would be in a more "best potential" list.  

I don't rate Saunders as highly as some. To me, Frankie Gavin is a far more talented fighter.

I think its generally accepted Goodtime is more talented than Saunders.

I havent seen enough of Gavin. He seemed to fall off the radar with personal issues. Saunders has a lot of fans but wouldnt crack my top ten as things stand now. I couldnt see him beating Murray. Andy Lee would would be a good a fight for Saunders.

That would be a good fight.

3fingers wrote:

At no point did I say Wilder had flair. I said the division needs a wild, aggressive, limited and vulnerable banger. I hope Wilder comes good, Joshua does not excite me.

The problem with aggressive, limited, vulnerable bangers is that once they've taken an inevitable beating or two, they either retire or lose some of that wild, aggressiveness in a usually vain attempt to resurrect their career.

Price fits the bill - although exciting while it lasts, they're certainly not the sort who are going to light up a division for any length of time.

I like vulnerability in a fighter....hearns, khan, wilder, jackson etc.

I agree price is vulnerable and can bang, though, he's methodical and far from an exciting swinger. Any aggressiveness he did have will be kept in check from now on, like wlad. Doesn't always have to be that way though, there are plenty of examples.