Boxing News 24 Forum

Boxing News 24 Forum (http://www.boxingforum24.com/index.php)
-   British Boxing Forum (http://www.boxingforum24.com/forumdisplay.php?f=8)
-   -   Do you consider the WBO to be.... (http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=418617)

Bronxbull666 07-19-2012 05:21 AM

Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
a major title, or lesser of the 4 main bodies? Do you rank the bodies in order of prestige or by their history? And, is the IBO edging towards becoming a major body? The IBO has headlined in Vegas and has been held by some top fighters. Or can only one title be considered true?

ollyc 07-19-2012 06:24 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
Unfortunately it is now a major title. Elite level fighters have spoken. Look at some of the big fights in recent memory billed as world titles fights with the WBO belt as the only title on the line: Cotto and Pac's welterweight reigns, Bradley's light welter run etc). Furthermore the Ring now acknowledges the belt, having not always done so.

However in the past I have always ranked beneath the other three belts in terms of prestige and glamour, due to the WBO's lack of history. These days i'd say they are probably level pegging with the WBA and the WBC.

Bajingo 07-19-2012 06:28 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
It's definitely one of the main 4 now. Hopefully with their ridiculous no unification rule the WBC will soon slide into irrelevance.

ollyc 07-19-2012 06:31 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bajingo (Post 13382370)
It's definitely one of the main 4 now. Hopefully with their ridiculous no unification rule the WBC will soon slide into irrelevance.

The WBC don't really have a 'no unification rule', as evidenced by the Khan - Garcia bout.

The Trout Canelo bout was not granted unification status as Trout is not a world champion. He holds that meaningless regular title.

Earl-hickey 07-19-2012 06:37 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
yeah it's just as meaningless as the other 3

Earl-hickey 07-19-2012 06:38 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ollyc (Post 13382378)
The WBC don't really have a 'no unification rule', as evidenced by the Khan - Garcia bout.

The Trout Canelo bout was not granted unification status as Trout is not a world champion. He holds that meaningless regular title.

Suliman has ordered the winner of that fight to drop the WBA or be stripped of the WBC

it was only a "unification" because khan got handed the title back at the 11th hour

Bajingo 07-19-2012 06:45 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Earl-hickey (Post 13382397)
Suliman has ordered the winner of that fight to drop the WBA or be stripped of the WBC

it was only a "unification" because khan got handed the title back at the 11th hour

:deal

And Ioka the Japanese strawweight champion had to drop the WBC belt a few days after unifying. If they keep enforcing the rule than I hope fighters just choose to dump their titles and they'll either change the rule or become another WBF.

Bronxbull666 07-19-2012 07:04 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
Ward holds WBA and WBC?

Earl-hickey 07-19-2012 07:09 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bajingo (Post 13382417)
:deal

And Ioka the Japanese strawweight champion had to drop the WBC belt a few days after unifying. If they keep enforcing the rule than I hope fighters just choose to dump their titles and they'll either change the rule or become another WBF.

This is what I think they should do

Skip to 7:05

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5FzI5pplXk[/ame]

Bronxbull666 07-19-2012 07:20 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Earl-hickey (Post 13382520)
This is what I think they should do

Skip to 7:05

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]

Good old JBL. Pure class!

TBooze 07-19-2012 07:23 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bronxbull666 (Post 13382109)
a major title, or lesser of the 4 main bodies? Do you rank the bodies in order of prestige or by their history? And, is the IBO edging towards becoming a major body? The IBO has headlined in Vegas and has been held by some top fighters. Or can only one title be considered true?

The WBO may now be Great Dane **** rather than Chihuahua ****, but they are still dog ****, just bigger and thus potentially more messier.

BlackBrenny 07-19-2012 09:37 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
lol its funny, remember Bowe vs Hide, Jim Lampley "we do not consider this title a true world title" now its just as relevant as the others. man, politics

slip&counter 07-19-2012 09:52 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
It's WHO you fight. Not WHAT you fight for.

Sly 07-19-2012 10:07 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
Nah. Any organisation that has Nathan Cleverly listed as a world champion can go do one. He's never beaten anything close to a world-class opponent.

Lilo 07-19-2012 10:31 AM

Re: Do you consider the WBO to be....
 
I was thinking this the other day.

The IBO is definitely creeping up and there'll be a top 5 within a few years.

Wlad Klit seems to treat it no differently to the others. Ricky Hatton held it for years too (at LWW). Lennox Lewis held it for years too.

Not sure how good or bad they are in all fairness.

They claim to use the "only unbiased ranking system" which is computerised.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:09 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2015