I dont mean to offend anyone by saying I think out of the current UK world champions Ricky Burns is the weakest of the champions, He is feather fisted and his defences have been against people from Africa and one guy from Europe both had about 15 fights each before the world title shot. Part of this is ofc Frank Warren being Warren. But I mean Ricky Burns holds the WBO title that was once held by Diego Corrales, Could you imagine the massacre that Diego would inflict on Burns? I really do feel he is the weakest out of Haye, Froch, Khan. Burns couldnt Carry Diego Corrales jock strap. I think a few more title defences against unknowns and then when an undefeated mandatory comes along he will loose, I give it another 2/3 defences.
It's a little unfair to compare him to Froch, Khan or Haye at this stage. There is absolutely no shame in coming last on that list. Pointless thread
its a pointless thread i agree. your just trolling to get billy nelsons attention and try to wind him up.
Also, just noticed you've only had 84 posts. Go and take a **** to yourself newb, you've got no place on here trying to be a wind up merchant to folk like Billy Nelson.
None of them deserve to be in the HOF on their boxing achievements up to this point. They may in the future (although I'd eat my hat if Haye beats the Klits) but even Froch hasn't done enough to be a hall of fame fighter yet. Back on topic, I agree that Burns is the weakest of the champions but so what? He beat the top dog in the division (something Khan has yet to do) and even if he does have some weak defences and eventually loses, he'll have achieved far more than most boxers. How long will he be champion? It depends on how he is matched.
You don't think Froch's wins over Pascal, Abraham and Taylor, Haye's unification of the Cruiserweight division and moving up win the heavyweight title put them up there or even ahead of the likes of HOFer Barry McGuigan?
The old McGuigan chestnut, if every boxer who had the same accomplishments of McGuigan be entered into the HOF there would be thousands in there. He shouldn't be in there by all rights, and I'm saying that as an Irishman and a big McGuigan fan. Froch is one big win away from HOF status in my opinion. (Ward, Bute, Kessler) Haye beat two very average title holders to unify and barely beat one of the worst heavyweight title holders ever. Enzo and Mormeck are no better than guys the Klits beat on a regular basis. People dress up his record by saying he unified, which sounds impressive but when you break it down it isn't all that breath taking. The guys he beat weren't even as good as Adamek. It's like Sturm unifying by beating Sylvester and moving up and beating Sartison. Haye's resume is nowhere near HOF worthy. There is simply no argument to be made for Haye right now.
He's the best of a terrible, terrible division. Until someone steps up, he'll be the best. Fair play to him, though, he can only beat whats in front of him, but the reality is, he's well beyond what he should achieve.
I can see what you're saying about Haye, I suppose you have to be careful not to be blinded by titles and multiple weight divisions. I think Froch is there though, he's had three very good solid against Elite fighters, outbrawling Pascal, coming from behind to knock out Taylor and pitching a shutout against Abraham.
Yes he is, Khan/Haye are the strongest title holders at the moment... Froch is yet to become an established world champion but credit to him he has been facing some of the best in his division.
Froch is well more legite than Haye won his title from a guy(valuev) that that got a homer decision against a 90 year old evander holyfield, then defended against against a guy(Ruiz) to whom had lost twice to Valuev in title fights then fought Audley, I dont think haye has showed much yet at heavywieght
Froch never unified the titles, spent most of his career talking about calzaghe and was totally outclassed by Kessler, Still lets see how he does in the super six.