Following on from Johnny Nelson's 'not as bad as it could of been' p4p list and Carl Froch's pretty solid set of selctions comes Matthew Macklin's top 10 p4p fighters which starts off sensible enough before descending into farce in the second half. http://www.skysports.com/boxing/new...acklin-ranks-vasyl-lomachenko-the-worlds-best Thoughts on a postcard please.
AJ shouldn't be anywhere near the P4P lists. Heavies is a strange division of poor technique and terrible fitness.
Joshua's inclusion is silly IMO. And even if you rate Spence I don't see how he could ranked over Inoue. As for Charlo...
'but Jermall is the one I think will go on and establish himself as a big name in boxing.' So according to Macklin, Charlo is not yet established and yet has a place in his P4P top 10. Idiotic....
Top 4 are pretty good. Inoue behind Spence is crap. Joshua #10 is garbage, too. Inoue is 25 years old and won world titles in three different weight classes. How on earth he is ranked behind Spence? Charlo should be ranked between #10-15 by the way although i think he definitely has Top 10 potential. But he needs to face some real opposition at MW. Heiland and Centeno are bums. I think Frochs ranking is the most accurate one. Then Macklin. And Nelsons ranking is a ****ing joke, he DKSAB.
It's a pretty sad reflection of Nelson that I thought his list would actually be much much worse than it ended up being.
Not a bad list, i dont agree with Charlo or Joshua being in there, Charlo still needs to show us he deserves to be in there and even though im an Anthony Joshua fan i just dont see how he can be brought in there.
