Best "recent" uk fighter

While the us has been by far the most dominant nation in boxing historically speaking, the uk is among the best of the rest. In your opinion, who are the best five uk fighters since the 60s?

 

On the top.of my head, id go with:

Lennox
Froch-calzaghe-hatton(basically a tie depending on what you rate most highly)
Hamed

Honorable mention: Minter, Haye, Conteh, benn, eubank, fury

Though I'm sure I'm forgetting a ton of guys

 

John Conteh was a helluva lot better than Froch, and would have beaten Calzaghe.

Ken Buchanan can't be left off the top 5, and is arguably the best.

 

Yeah for sure, he has a good argument to be in the top 5. But i feel his resume is a bit lighter than these guys.

And yes, Buchanan, and mcguigan to a lesser extent, definitely deserves a mention

 

Froch would have lost to Jorge Ahumada, Chris Finnegan, and CERTAINLY to Yauqi Lopez.

You said "best" anyway. While we can compare resumes, Conteh was a far superior talent and technician than Froch.

 

I don't think we can separate best and resume. Theres ton of fighter who looked good, if not great, against fringe oppositions, yet couldn't cut it at the elite level.

But yeah, retinking about it, Conteh resume wasnt much worse than the one of Froch and Calzaghe one, so i guess he's probably in that tier

 

I think the clear top three are Lewis, Calzaghe then Buchanan - then Conteh. It might be just my own bias, but I truly believe Michael Watson should be next. Unless I'm omitting somebody obvious.

Rudkin, Winstone and McGowan are all just as good as Froch or Hatton IMO.

 

I forgot about McGowan. Wonderful little technician - shitty skin.

 

I tend to think of McGugian as better than Froch and Hatton.

They both beat out Barry in longevity, but for pure peak, McGugian was a higher caliber talent.

 

Yeah watson definitely deserves a mention. Though i feel that him getting thrashed by McCallum put a bit of a question mark on him (i know the excuses, but still). Shame that his career was cut short, since it would have given us a much better view of him.

And i feel that you rate calz way too highly. Sure he was "undefeated", but his opposition wasnt top notch. Hatton would have looked as good as him, imo, if he only fought mid level opposition like calz did for pretty much all his career (he was blowing out guys like Spad and a past it Castillo). This is one of my pet peeve with boxing fans

 

Lewis, Buchanan, Calzaghe, Fury, Conteh.

 

This is a pretty good 5. In fact, I might actually have the same exact 5.

 

I feel like Lewis, Buchanan, and Calzaghe are the three guys every list must have.

The other 2 spots can be debated.

 

Ok, I think I've got my list. It's gonna be nearly the same as Slice's, only mine swaps out Fury, and replaces him with Naz.

On a P4P level, I think peak Naz would smoke Fury/Wilder/AJ.

I also consider peak Naz better than Froch, Hatton, McGugian, ect.

Lewis
Buchanan
Calzaghe
Conteh
Naz

 

#05. Michael Watson
#04. John Conteh
#03. Ken Buchanan
#02. Joe Calzaghe
#01. Lennox Lewis

This would be my top five of the 'best'.

 

My God, Froch vs Naz (P4P) is one freakish looking fight.

 

Hahaha shit I totally had a brainfart and forgot about Naz. Might need a rethink.

 

P4P, prime Hamed would knock Froch's head into the cheap seats. This guy was dropped hard on his ass by Taylor and Groves - two NON punchers.

God help him getting hit by one of the biggest P4P punchers ever.

 

I think Groves was quite an underrated puncher. He wasn't Julian Jackson but he had fast hands and could bang. I do agree though that p4p Naz takes Froch out.

 

I feel like I should have an answer and I really don't. Lewis is the number 1 but then after that, I'm not sure at all. Will have a think and return.

MTF

 

Yeah, Hamed has gotten way underrated since the man fight. Sure he lost, and he looked foolish at time, but it wasn't the blowout that its painted as. And he beat a lot of good fighters impressively before that

He definitely deserves a spot in the top 5 imo

 

Im not so sure. Froch could be hurt, but finishing him was a whole different story. A p4p fight between the two would be very interesting. I could see froch imposing his strength and will on Hamed, but i could also see Naz bouncing him off the canvas with well timed counters

 

I think 'best' and 'greatest' are different things. The simple example is that I'd pick Calzaghe to light Froch up horribly, largely due to styles but also because I think he was simply better than Carl, but I have no hesitation in saying that Froch is 'greater', because of his resume.

MTF

 

At least, we all seen to agree that LL is nb 1 ( though his "britishness" is very discutable)

 

I haven't seen a MM that Froch doesn't get killed in, yet in actual fights, as in ones that happened against other world class fighters, he won almost all of them.

His intangibles are still incredibly underrated.

MTF

 

Theorically speaking, yes they are different, but factually, when we rated fighters, i dont think we can separate them.

Weve seen way too much boxers looking like a million dollar against B+ opponents, yet unable to even win against A- ones

 

He wasn't British at all, but if we go down that route, a can of worms is opened and then some.

MTF

 

I think all the fighters worthy of consideration are listed already here. Can't see any argument for those just outside, like Benn, Eubanks, Joshua, Finnegan, Honeyghan, Minter...etc

Hard to put them in order, though.

MTF

 

I can't envision Froch winning at all. He simply did not have the skill and talent to pull off what Barrera did.

If you're gonna beat Hamed being as open as Froch was, your chin had better be STEEL.

Froch's chin was solid, but not granite.

 

Weirdly enough, i think Froch gets underrated cause he mostly fought elite level guys. During his prime, he only fought one non elite guy (yussuf mack) and he was extremely impressive. Im fairly sure that if he had taken the calzaghe approach, the whole narrative about him being unskilled wouldnt exist