I'm not sure whether anyone has mentioned this on here but they have put Carl Froch at 3 and moved David Haye down to 4th. I really can't see how this can be right with David Haye unifying and Froch only just winning one title against an unproved fighter in Jean Pascal.
I can't stand the ***** but Haye is clear #3 right now. **** Froch and his bandwagon jumpers. A matter of time before this guy gets beaten.
I suppose it is because Haye has moved up to heavy and is yet to do anything of note (hardly his fault) whilst Froch has won an alphabelt at 168. More of a technicality than anything else - they have to rank our two world champs in the top 5! Hatton and Calzaghe pick themselves in the top 2, Haye would be #3 on most people's lists followed by Froch and probably Witter, but anyways............. The BBC had Maccarinelli at #3 after he blew away a bum and Haye had beaten Mormeck - whilst Witter and Woods had to settle for lower slots WTF!!!!!!!
Still no sold on froch and find it a joke that he's above haye. He unified a division beating mormeck and enzo. Froch beat an untested fighter in Pascal.
They must be putting a lot of value in the fact that Froch is undefeated... I'd certainly have Haye above Froch.
BBC are not alone, there are plenty of bandwagon jumpers on Frochs balls at the mo... Haye is cleary superior to Carl Froch...clearly.
Aye, jettisoning Froch above Haye is daft. It's a subjective list anyway, by an organization which stays away from pro boxing.
Couldn't agree more 46and0, what do the BBC know about boxing. Wasn’t the last live fight shown on there involving Audley? Haye is certainly above Froch, andit will be interesting to see who Froch’s next opponent will be.
I actually thought that Hatton's performance against Malignaggi was somewhat ascendant if anything...
