Personally i rank fighters by results, of course performances is a factor, but for me results is what counts.. Huck is not a top 10 heavy, since he is 0-1.
not sure who the 9 and 10 are but based on the fight hes high up his power carried up, he can take a shot, he man handled a bigger man and just looked good issues, too small for the Klitschkos, low work rate that may have cost him some rounds, looked tired near the end of the fight
Lucky for us, not everybody is as blind and ignorant as you, or we wouldn't have had Huck/Povetkin in the first place (0-0 fighting for a title), Chisora/Vitali (2 losses in a row) or even Haye (a few fights before fighting Valuev). You dont happen to be an accountant, do you?
He almost beat a guy who will only lose to Klitschko brothers. Povetkin looked poor but really that version of Povetkin still beats anyone not named Klitschko. So yes Huck deserves to be mentioned as a top 10 heavyweight fighter. It was a surprisingly good performance.
