Real World champions who were British and number 1

With the world of fragmented titles ,I was asking myself the question how many British " WORLD " belt holders were actually the best in their weight class - therefore a true world champion.
For example someone like Steve Robinson was never world champion in real terms.

I will start with a few :

1. Lloyd Honeyghan - he was WW champion and for a while the divisions best.
2. Lennox Lewis - pretty much beat everyone out there to be number 1.

Please lets discuss and compare who was for real ,or who was a belt wearing fraud.

List those as follows.

FOR REAL

OR

FRAUD

Naz
Calzaghe
Hatton

All regarded as no.1 in their divison, P4P rated and lineal champions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Naz
Calzaghe
Hatton

All regarded as no.1 in their divison, P4P rated and lineal champions.

---

Yes .

anymore ?

Jack Kid Berg

Bob Fitzsimmons, 1st 3 time division champ at MW, LHW, and HW.

Jimmy Wilde

Most people will hate to admit it, but Haye as a cruiser was definatley top dog.

It's funny, as much as I love Hatton, I never quite considered him the very best at any point. There were always those question marks about how he would do against the very best. Those marks were Unfortunatley answered.

Do we regard John Stracey as number 1 ?
Barry Mcguigan ? (or azumah number 1 ).

please discuss.

bruno

froch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

Most people will hate to admit it, but Haye as a cruiser was definatley top dog.

It's funny, as much as I love Hatton, I never quite considered him the very best at any point. There were always those question marks about how he would do against the very best. Those marks were Unfortunatley answered.

---

Yeah they'll hate to admit it but it's a fact. Haye was lineal cruiserweight champion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

froch

---

Um no you windup. Andre Ward and Kessler weren't even real number 1's, again I know you're a windup but it's still a stupid post.

Also, why would anyone hate to admit Haye was number 1 at cruiserweight? He was. I mean I guess he never beat Oneil Bell but hardly anyone else could have been considered number 1 at the weight when he was. Oh wait Mormeck beat Bell a second time, so yeah there is no way to argue otherwise. Haye a heavyweight champion? Only technically and in his own mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

froch

---

Um no you windup. Andre Ward and Kessler weren't even real number 1's, again I know you're a windup but it's still a stupid post.

---

who was/is number one then chimp?

your post is stupider

Nigel Benn deserves to make this list I think.

Nobody really, if anybody at the moment then I'd say Ward obviously. Before that Kessler and before Calzaghe. But Kessler and Ward never had a foothold on the position that can't be disputed. Froch definitely didn't ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amat

Nobody really, if anybody at the moment then I'd say Ward obviously. Before that Kessler and before Calzaghe. But Kessler and Ward never had a foothold on the position that can't be disputed. Froch definitely didn't ever.

---

are you making your own rules up on the thread now dude?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

are you making your own rules up on the thread now dude?

---

It's pretty fucking simple. Froch held the title for three fights (if you want to count the fight with pascal).. 2 of which weren't against anyone in the top 5 of the division, and the third time he was given an absolute gift of a decision. No way he's ever been number 1 in his division.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DatsiK

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

are you making your own rules up on the thread now dude?

---

It's pretty fucking simple. Froch held the title for three fights (if you want to count the fight with pascal).. 2 of which weren't against anyone in the top 5 of the division, and the third time he was given an absolute gift of a decision. No way he's ever been number 1 in his division.

---

chill bro

i think he was and still is the best, and it wasnt a gift of a decision but i dont fancy that debate

Bruno was never the best Heavyweight in the world. At the time he was WBC champ, George Foreman had the lineal title & Riddick Bowe was the only one you could argue was a better HW at that point.

Carl Froch has never really had a hold on the #1 spot at 168, as at least one of Kessler, Bute & Ward have all been ranked above him whilst he was WBC champ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Bruno was never the best Heavyweight in the world. At the time he was WBC champ, George Foreman had the lineal title & Riddick Bowe was the only one you could argue was a better HW at that point.

Carl Froch has never really had a hold on the #1 spot at 168, as at least one of Kessler, Bute & Ward have all been ranked above him whilst he was WBC champ.

---

Bruno is the best heavyweight in history

froch is better than kessler bute and ward

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Bruno was never the best Heavyweight in the world. At the time he was WBC champ, George Foreman had the lineal title & Riddick Bowe was the only one you could argue was a better HW at that point.

Carl Froch has never really had a hold on the #1 spot at 168, as at least one of Kessler, Bute & Ward have all been ranked above him whilst he was WBC champ.

---

Bruno is the best heavyweight in history

froch is better than kessler bute and ward

---

Being on a wind-up is fine if you're funny with it, but you just aren't mate.

We've already got Hammer who does the whole patriotic fool schtick that you're trying to run with, and to be honest he does it much better, because it's just enough that you're not sure whether he's serious or pulling your leg.

You need to go away, read his posts & understand how to step up your game ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Bruno was never the best Heavyweight in the world. At the time he was WBC champ, George Foreman had the lineal title & Riddick Bowe was the only one you could argue was a better HW at that point.

Carl Froch has never really had a hold on the #1 spot at 168, as at least one of Kessler, Bute & Ward have all been ranked above him whilst he was WBC champ.

---

Bruno is the best heavyweight in history

froch is better than kessler bute and ward

---

Being on a wind-up is fine if you're funny with it, but you just aren't mate.

We've already got Hammer who does the whole patriotic fool schtick that you're trying to run with, and to be honest he does it much better, because it's just enough that you're not sure whether he's serious or pulling your leg.

You need to go away, read his posts & understand how to step up your game ;)

---

ha, ill do as you say dude and learn from the master

just so i know tho, which bit of my post did you think was a wind up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Bruno was never the best Heavyweight in the world. At the time he was WBC champ, George Foreman had the lineal title & Riddick Bowe was the only one you could argue was a better HW at that point.

Carl Froch has never really had a hold on the #1 spot at 168, as at least one of Kessler, Bute & Ward have all been ranked above him whilst he was WBC champ.

---

Bruno is the best heavyweight in history

froch is better than kessler bute and ward

---

Being on a wind-up is fine if you're funny with it, but you just aren't mate.

We've already got Hammer who does the whole patriotic fool schtick that you're trying to run with, and to be honest he does it much better, because it's just enough that you're not sure whether he's serious or pulling your leg.

You need to go away, read his posts & understand how to step up your game ;)

---

ha, ill do as you say dude and learn from the master

just so i know tho, which bit of my post did you think was a wind up?

---

Definitely the first bit about Bruno being the best HW in history.

Maybe the 2nd bit, but I can see someone stupid believing that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Bruno was never the best Heavyweight in the world. At the time he was WBC champ, George Foreman had the lineal title & Riddick Bowe was the only one you could argue was a better HW at that point.

Carl Froch has never really had a hold on the #1 spot at 168, as at least one of Kessler, Bute & Ward have all been ranked above him whilst he was WBC champ.

---

Bruno is the best heavyweight in history

froch is better than kessler bute and ward

---

Being on a wind-up is fine if you're funny with it, but you just aren't mate.

We've already got Hammer who does the whole patriotic fool schtick that you're trying to run with, and to be honest he does it much better, because it's just enough that you're not sure whether he's serious or pulling your leg.

You need to go away, read his posts & understand how to step up your game ;)

---

ha, ill do as you say dude and learn from the master

just so i know tho, which bit of my post did you think was a wind up?

---

Definitely the first bit about Bruno being the best HW in history.

Maybe the 2nd bit, but I can see someone stupid believing that.

---

i cant believe a british man doesnt know the bruno fact, you mustnt have been around when he was at his peak

why is its stupid to believe froch is the best?

Eric wtf mate, you are one bizzare dude.

When was Bruno ever number 1?

Or Froch? The one defining fight Froch has had, he lost. (although I hope he can get a win soon over Artur)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

When was Bruno ever number 1?

Or Froch? The one defining fight Froch has had, he lost. (although I hope he can get a win soon over Artur)

---

i think froch is the best in the division

and he did lose to kes, but me as well as a lot of boxing experts think he won

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

When was Bruno ever number 1?

Or Froch? The one defining fight Froch has had, he lost. (although I hope he can get a win soon over Artur)

---

i think froch is the best in the division

and he did lose to kes, but me as well as a lot of boxing experts think he won

---

But he still lost.

Plus the question wasn't who do you think is best in the division. Compare Froch's achievments to even Hayes at Cruiserweight and you'll see there is no way he can be considered a real world champ.

If he wins the super six (which I'm hoping) then he is in with a shout.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

When was Bruno ever number 1?

Or Froch? The one defining fight Froch has had, he lost. (although I hope he can get a win soon over Artur)

---

i think froch is the best in the division

and he did lose to kes, but me as well as a lot of boxing experts think he won

---

You & Hammer you mean ;D

Froch isn't the best in the division & you'd struggle to say he was at any point. Look at where he was each time he had a signature win & where his opponents were.

Pascal - Bute having just had a controversial win over Librado Andrade, and with Kessler still out for some time, this is the closest point to Froch being #1, but he had yet to really beat anyone in the Top 10. At this point most still considered Kessler #1 based on his past achievements.

Taylor - Bute erased his questionable win over Andrade with a comprehensive win in the rematch. Andrade was more highly rated than Taylor at this point, not to mention that Taylor was winning the fight going into the 12th. Bute was winning when he stopped Andrade in the 4th.

Dirrell - A victory considered at best questionable by most, with some considering it a robbery. On the same night, Abraham beats Froch's previous opponent far more convincingly. For what it's worth I'd still rate Froch ahead of him after this. A month later Ward shuts out Kessler & moves away with Bute as the clear leader in the division.

Kessler - Froch loses fight on the cards. Most have Kessler winning, some have a Froch win. However, in comparison to the defeat to Ward, Froch falls from being considered the best in the division in any way. Whether you thought he won or not, the fact is Ward was far more convincing in doing so that Froch. Bute fights Edison Miranda & some bald bus driver from Wisconsin.

So no Benn or Eubank? No Minter? No Wilde? No Prince Naz?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

So no Benn or Eubank? No Minter? No Wilde? No Prince Naz?

---

naz and Wilde have been accepted , eubank was a media product.

the lack of response really sums up how much bullshit so called champions there are,
come on guys lets reason for some more champs

What about Alan Minter?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

What about Alan Minter?

---

There was guy called Marvin or something that was pretty good around that time :-\

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

What about Alan Minter?

---

Minter , hmmm was he the best all be it not for long ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

What about Alan Minter?

---

There was guy called Marvin or something that was pretty good around that time :-\

---

Yes and as I recall it was Haggler that beat Minter to win the title and become the best middleweight at the time. Ergo before the fight Minter was the guy of the division.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

Most people will hate to admit it, but Haye as a cruiser was definatley top dog.

It's funny, as much as I love Hatton, I never quite considered him the very best at any point. There were always those question marks about how he would do against the very best. Those marks were Unfortunatley answered.

---

Yeah they'll hate to admit it but it's a fact. Haye was lineal cruiserweight champion.

---

Haye never beat Cunningham who held the IBF belt so was never the undisputed champion...

I think he would of beaten him, but it never happened.

Seriously... 3 fucken pages and no "Kid" Lewis I'm disappointed.
Also Freddie Welsh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutMeMick

Seriously... 3 fucken pages and no "Kid" Lewis I'm disappointed.
Also Freddie Welsh.

---

Yes good examples , by the way this is an open thread , i didnt want to just list as many as i thought were for real , i wanted everyone to discuss.

So we have as follows.

Lennox Lewis
David Haye
Bob Fitzsimmons
Hamed
Lloyd Honeyghan
Kid Lewis
Alan Minter
Jimmy Wilde
Ricky Hatton

please list all if you want to add any so we can sum up at the end.

Example of a fragmented belt holder of the worst type , Duke McKenzie i mean he was never the best in any of the 3 divisions he held a belt in , so never a WORLD CHAMPION.

John Conteh..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mctaggert

Nigel Benn deserves to make this list I think.

---

I think James Toney and Roy Jones might have had something to say about that!

Also, though it pains me to mention him but does no one consider Watt the LW world champ until Arguello beat him??