Who are the Top 20 Greatest British Fighters?

[True Guru]

Johnny Nelson?
Yeah he had 12 losses but the last ten years of his career he never lost a fight and was a long reigning world champ
An incredible career when you look at it.

[Bright-Eyes]

Hide atleast defended his WBO title twice in his second reigh as champion and won the title before.

They were title defences against journeymen,they mean absolutely nothing.

If you want to knock his competitors than please talk about Bruno's great win over Oliver "Crying Baby" McCall. Hide is naturally a cruiser and small HW and NEVER lost to a guy same size or smaller. His major losses were to big HW's as Klitschko and Bowe two major HW champions of the last 20 years.

bruno fought and beat greater competition than Hide.His win over "crying baby" McCall is better than any win Hide has on his resume.


Losses don't count as accomplishments in regards to judging a fighters resume.And if they did,then Hide's resume looks even worse.

James Tillis, TNT TUcker, Mitch Blood Green, and Bonecrusher Smith all went the distance with Tyson as did Ruddock in their rematch; yet Bruno couldn't even go HALF the distance in his two fights with Tyson. BTW, the Tyson who came back from prison was not even a shell of the fighter who he was from 1985-1991.

How are bruno's losses to Tyson relevant? How are Tillis,Tucker,Green,Smith and Ruddock lasting the distance with a fighter Hide never faced relevant?

BTW, i also rate Hide win over Tucker anytime over the win by Bruno over Mccall. Tucker was undefeated for a good portion of his career and gave Tyson his biggest challenge from 1985-1989, he also beat Mccall the guy that Bruno got the paper title from.

James Tillis gave Tyson his biggest challenge and despite that,what Tucker did in 1987 is irrelevant because he was ten years older and shot when he fought Hide.

You mention the lost to Chingagu but dont mention he avenged his lost with by murdering Chingagu on 1 Rd. As far Hide's comback he almost had a title shot for the vacant WBO title against Maccarinelli even with few weeks notice but it didnt happen . He beat May who was ranked high by the WBO when he got that title shot. Hide is rated as high #6 currently by the WBO and is ranked by the WBC currently #3 as their intl champion. He is ranked by other organizations and publications. Atleast Hide holds a title at 38 while Hatton at 30 was KTFO by a former Flyweight champion and possibly finished with the sport. Guys like Marquez, Barrera, Larios, and Morales in the first fight.

Hide was never supposed to lose to Chingagu in the first place,a win is hardly something to brag over.Alphabet rankings are a complete joke.Any average no hoper can climb into the top ten rankings of these organisations.


Hide was knocked out by a bum.


How long ago was it that Pacquiao fought at flyweight again? Has he not won a world title one weight class above Hatton's career fighting weight?

Hatton was a hold and punch fighter than reduced boxing to a wrestling match. He has horrible defensive skills which allowed him to get KO'd by a check hook. I give him props for heart and determination and he could be ranked top 20 if you want to create your own list.

I'm not a fan of Hatton or his style.

But the fact that Hide has a title at 38 and is ranked does count for something. Hide won the WBO titles on two occassions, held intl titles in both HW and Cruiser. He has 0 losses to fighters smaller than him and has beat guys with height and reach advantages while giving over 20 pounds and has beaten an opponent who weighed like 90 pounds more than him.

Since when did intl titles mean anything?


Hide's record against world class opposition is 0-2

BTW, the final round against Collazo he was holding on for dear life and if that is not a 10-8 round than the judges who scored RD 5 10-8 for SRL against Hearns in the second fight must have been taking a controlled substance.

Hatton took no beating and was stunned at worse,hardly worthy of a 10-8 round.And even if you were generous enough to give Collazo a 10-8 round,you'd still have a very close fight.

Haye dominated a 7 foot 300 pound giant and held legit titles in 2 divisions while Bruno had 0 defenses of his title that he won by McCall.

And Haye is a far more accomplished fighter than Herbie Hide.

Johnny Nelson?
Yeah he had 12 losses but the last ten years of his career he never lost a fight and was a long reigning world champ
An incredible career when you look at it.

Along with a career defining performance against Carlos Deleon.

[musiol]

duke mckenzie he was a good fighter

[mickey malone]

Johnny Nelson?
Yeah he had 12 losses but the last ten years of his career he never lost a fight and was a long reigning world champ
An incredible career when you look at it.

Very good call as it goes.. I always tend to overlook Nelson, probably due to not forgiving him for the 12 rounds of diabolical crap in his 12 round draw with Carlos DeLeon, the only fight i've ever seen in which not a single genuine punch was thrown..

However, you're totally right, he did have an incredible 20 year career, and remained unbeaten for the last 10 years of it.. He was a late developer but without doubt, an in-form Nelson was something to beseige..
After losing his first 3 pro outings, he went on to win the British and European cruiserweight titles twice a piece.. Between 92 and 95 he lost 7 out of 11, but still managed to pick up WBF titles at CW and HW with wins over Dave Russell and Jimmy Thunder respectively.. He was outpointed by James Warring for the IBF CW title, but thoroughly outclassed Carl Thompson to win the WBO crown, defending it 13 times and retiring as undefeated champion.. In British terms, he should be an ATG but was involved in a few stinkers, which I think tends to overshaddow his true achievements..

[sonnyboyx2]

Nelson was a decent fighter, i seen him in 97 at sheffield arena on the undercard of Eubank vs Calzaghe, Nelson nearly took his opponents head-off in the opening round

[HaglerSteelChin]

@ Bright Eyes


Why bump your tedious argument after a week? Especially when Hide was replaced by Cribb?


Everything you wrote is pure subjective and we are still waiting for your top 20 list which may take you another year to post. I removed Hide over a week ago due to consistency for having only british born in the 4 places I listed in the original thread. I have replaced Hide with Tom Cribb one of the two most important Bare Knuckle boxers in british history along with Jem Mace.

It's easy to sit there and not put one minute to create your own list and troll around to try make silly arguments about forcing your opinion on anyone. Hatton never will make my top 20 and like someone else said in this thread they can "EASILY" find 20 british fighters higher in the list than Hatton. BTW, i saw the Collazo fight recently even if the final round is scored 10-9, i have the fight a draw. Since Collazo was champion he would hold on to the belt. This means i never saw Hatton win a fight at WW. He is a one division fighter unlike Hide.

Its not that he was destroyed by pac but it looked like he didnt even belong in the same ring. David Diaz is not exactly a great lightweight champ but atleast he lasted 9 rds and tried to make a fight. Hatton in the first round looked overmatched. I guess he wasent any king at 140 as some claimed.

Bruno didn't even go 6 rds with either version of Tyson and yes it shows how great he was when guys like Tillis, Green, Smith, and Ruddock lasted full distance against the 85-91 Tyson and he was destroyed by a mere shadow of Tyson. If beating McCall and not defending your title once is something to Put Bruno in the pantheon of british fighters than i guess its slap in the face to the last 200 years of british pugilism.

Losses don't count as accomplishments? I guess you didn't see the first Rocky Movie? Trust me the way you lose means something. Its hard to promote a fighter when he gets destroyed in 2 rds. Lets say Ricky hatton takes pacman the distance and loses 115-113, you think he is retired now? Perhaps he gets a rematch and still can make PPV money? If a fighter exceeds expectations even if they lose they gain respect by both the fans and industry.

Btw, to show how bias you are to say the dancing destroyer accomplished nothing and had no legacy is pretty demeaning. Did i say that about Hatton? I never said Hatton or Bruno were nobody.

In addition, to demonstrate your intelligence you claim that Bruno's win over Mccall is bigger than Hide's 2 round destruction of Tucker. TUcker beat MCcall so what does that say about McCall? Also Tucker was undefeated after 35 fights and a IBF champion you think MCcall is a greater name in a resume?

Now eat crowe and make your own list.

[GJC]

I have replaced Hide with Tom Cribb one of the two most important Bare Knuckle boxers in british history along with Jem Mace.

Daniel Mendoza too if you want to go waaaay back!

[Bright-Eyes]

@Haglersteelchin


First of all,there's no need to get all pissy because somebody doesn't agree with you.I've argued my points without lying,unlike you.I did not bump this thread and had you bothered looking at who posted some fifty minutes before me,you would have known this already.


What part of Tony Tucker was a an old shot fighter by 1997 do you not understand? Is it really that difficult to comprehend?

Winning a bunch of international,continental titles don't mean a damn thing and you still haven't explained why it's such an accomplishment.

No,losses don't count as an accomplishment when judging a fighters resume.And just so you know,Rocky was a movie.


Dark Destroyer? Do you even know who Hide was before you looked him up on boxrec?



I don't need to post a list to disagree with one particular pick that you made.



Considering you've made a number of alterations of your list when others have took issue with,I'm not the one who has eaten crow here.



Go watch Hide's fight with Joseph Chingangu while you're at it.

[HaglerSteelChin]

Daniel Mendoza too if you want to go waaaay back!

Very True and excellent post. I remember going over my bare knuckle list with the Great A and he is definitely one of the most influential and important british pugilist of the early 19th century. He definitely was important in advancing the sport and his considered by some to be the father of scientific boxing. He was champion in both the HW and MW divisions and is important in boxing history. I will replace David Haye with Mendoza

[HaglerSteelChin]

@Haglersteelchin


First of all,there's no need to get all pissy because somebody doesn't agree with you.I've argued my points without lying,unlike you.I did not bump this thread and had you bothered looking at who posted some fifty minutes before me,you would have known this already.


What part of Tony Tucker was a an old shot fighter by 1997 do you not understand? Is it really that difficult to comprehend?

Winning a bunch of international,continental titles don't mean a damn thing and you still haven't explained why it's such an accomplishment.

No,losses don't count as an accomplishment when judging a fighters resume.And just so you know,Rocky was a movie.


Dark Destroyer? Do you even know who Hide was before you looked him up on boxrec?



I don't need to post a list to disagree with one particular pick that you made.



Considering you've made a number of alterations of your list when others have took issue with,I'm not the one who has eaten crow here.



Go watch Hide's fight with Joseph Chingangu while you're at it.

You edited the orginal post you had. You had the incorrect record of Chingangu like 3-6 when he fought Hide and you confused it with Chingangu and that is why i said the fight ended shortly after a clash of heads. I have the career sets of Bowe and Klitschko and I have seen Hide fight before. I saw his wins and i did review the lists of greatest british fighters on various publications when i made my top 200 a while back and he made some of those lists. Hide has never lost to a fighter who was of equal or smaller size than him. You claimed that all of Hide wins at Cruiser were to unranked or unrated fighters and that already has been exposed as untrue.

You keep mentioning the Chingangu lost as it was never avenged with a 1st round KO. Did Bruno or Hatton avenge any of their brutal KO's?

I edited the list by keeping it consistent with my own rule of fighters born only in the four countries listed as part of the United Kingdom. Many great irish fighters didnt make it and i removed Hide for that reason. GJC just reminded me of Mendoza the third great british bareknuckler, very useful suggestion, he definitely deservers great consideration just on impact and certainly more influential in the history of British Pugilism than Danny Williams, RIcky Hatton, and Bruno.

If you had written your own list i woudlnt waste my time calling you out for any trivial stuff. Because guess what everyone has their own list and is entitled to their opinion. There are various factors people decide on what is greatness? Some look at who you beat, how often you fought, your techinical skill, weight and reach disadvantages, fighting and winning in foreign countries, the number of titles, titles in different weight classeses etc. Sure people can make suggestions and recomendations. Bruno and Hatton dosent make my list if you love them than have them on your list.

I never called out anyone in the top mexican or top argentine list even if we had disagreements. I am sure people didnt agree with me having Juan martin Coggi as high as I did.

After the lists of Mexican and Argentine fighters i started the thread. I could have asked who do you regard as the top 20 greatest british fighters? Some people start threads without adding nothing just asking. The top 10-15 guys are straight out of my own top 200 list, the last few i threw in.

The ignorance is that people bring their own opinion in assessing a fighter's career. Ricky Hatton won a good portion of his fights due to fighting in Manchester. He hits in back of the head, grabs and holds, hits during breaks, grabs and arm hits with another. If you think Hatton is techinically a proficient fighter than fine. If he had fought outiside of manchester he wouldnt have got away with half of that stuff. Remember mayweather vs Hatton? The english fans went crazy because Cortez wouldnt allow hatton to hit and hold. In addition, he was hitting in back of the head and was warranted in having his point taken away. How many points did hatton have taken away in all of those fights in Manchester?

Bruno got murdered in 3 rounds by a fighter who had been in prison for several years and is like 5 inches shorter and who gives up more than 10 inches in reach. He got murdered by Tyson twice. You belittle Tucker but he also lasted the distance with Lewis another fighter that murdered Bruno.

Hide lost only to bigger guys and also beat bigger guys. You call his titles paper titles but he held titles in two weight classes. Hide is currently ranked and what are Bruno and Hatton doing?

You belittle fighters as Hide and say he had no legacy and accomplished nothing. Gee you must have accomplished a great deal to belittle someone who has held titles and fought big prizefights.

You mention as fact losses dont count for nothing? How about if the lost is disputed and its a SD? Is a SD, MD, or UD, or a TKO the same? Why is there debates about Norton's fights with Ali or Holmes? Pacquaio vs Marquez 2 didn't help JMM when many thought won the fight. Do you think hatton's lost to Pacquiao is similar to Marquez lost to Pacquiao? Why did Marquez keep fighting and Hatton retire?