What criteria do you use for your HW ratings?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by bailey, Sep 24, 2024.


  1. bailey

    bailey Loyal Member Full Member

    39,975
    3,107
    Dec 11, 2009
    I do agree that there are alot of inconsistencies but could they not in the scenario you mention be thought of slightly different due to a fighter rising up in weight against bigger opponents?
    I know you were just giving an example btw
     
  2. bailey

    bailey Loyal Member Full Member

    39,975
    3,107
    Dec 11, 2009
    Do you see it all about one fight though?
    I thought Zhang did better against Wilder than Fury but wouldn't put him above Fury, though would possibly rate Parker above now, due to recent wins
     
  3. gollumsluvslave

    gollumsluvslave Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,373
    5,361
    Dec 20, 2020
    1) Form - e.g. last 5 results
    2) Overall resume & achievements
    3) Style & eye test / intangibles

    NB, there is no difference here for HW vs any other division IMO
     
  4. kostya by ko

    kostya by ko Boxing Addict

    5,569
    4,361
    Feb 18, 2005
    So.e ki d of vague feeling that unconsciously accounts for the objective factors others have mentioned.
     
  5. AdamT

    AdamT Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    5,743
    10,151
    Sep 18, 2019
    Nope, not unless it was his first or second fight
    Usyk is a fully fledged heavyweight. I doubt Floyd got any brownie points for beating guys at 147, despite starting at 130

    I remember him being blasted for fighting a similar sized Hatton at 147, as hatton fought at 140. Now Floyd started at 130

    If usyk stepped up from cruiser to beat Fury, then yes maybe, but he's been a heavyweight for years now and he's a solid sized heavyweight now, not small by any means

    If an untrained boxer can give Fury fits and that makes him rubbish? Then why should Usyk be made legend for such a competitive fight?

    Now these are not my thoughts above regarding the triangle theory of Fury/Ngannou/usyk

    My thoughts are Fury is LEVELs above what he showed that night and majorly underperformed, not for the first time I might add. Usyk fought the version of the guy that imo no other heavyweight today could beat. Certainly not the guys fighting on Saturday past

    Imo the Usyk win over fury adds massively to his resume. Not because he was a former cruiser, but because he beat the best in the division and rightfully proved as of now he is the man

    I sorry for the essay, but I can't stand double standards. You can't downplay Fury as a fighter, then make usyk a legend for the win. It doesn't work that way. I don't care if he was a cruiserweight

    But anyone who isn't biased will know Fury is a very good fighter and it was a fantastic win
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2024
  6. MrPook

    MrPook Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,321
    3,330
    Apr 15, 2007
    Wilder was not the same fighter anymore when he did fight Zhang.
     
  7. bailey

    bailey Loyal Member Full Member

    39,975
    3,107
    Dec 11, 2009
    Often fighters aren't the same after a loss.
    What about Parker though?
     
  8. northpaw

    northpaw Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    17,234
    10,793
    Jun 5, 2010
    Wins, losses and draws. The more recent the better. What have they done lately and how they looked doing it, and who they did it against.

    That's it. I don't think it's rocket science.

    And I judge every division the same way
     
  9. bailey

    bailey Loyal Member Full Member

    39,975
    3,107
    Dec 11, 2009
    I agree
    I think Fury is a very good HW
    I think there are alot of good HWs during these recent times
     
    AdamT likes this.