Do you consider the WBO to be....

Bronxbull666 · 07-19-2012, 05:21 AM

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

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

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bajingo

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

yeah it's just as meaningless as the other 3

Earl-hickey · 07-19-2012, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ollyc

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Earl-hickey

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

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

Ward holds WBA and WBC?

Earl-hickey · 07-19-2012, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bajingo

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Earl-hickey

This is what I think they should do

Skip to 7:05

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Good old JBL. Pure class!

TBooze · 07-19-2012, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bronxbull666

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 shit rather than Chihuahua shit, but they are still dog shit, just bigger and thus potentially more messier.

BlackBrenny · 07-19-2012, 09:37 AM

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

It's WHO you fight. Not WHAT you fight for.

Sly · 07-19-2012, 10:07 AM

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

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.

07-19-2012, 05:21 AM	#1
Bronxbull666 The Beast From The East ESB Addict Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: In bed Posts: 3,191 vCash: 75	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?
Top

07-19-2012, 06:24 AM	#2
ollyc Belt holder ESB Addict Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 2,254 vCash: 876	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.
Top

07-19-2012, 06:28 AM	#3
Bajingo Undisputed Champion East Side VIP Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 12,253 vCash: 1479	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.
Top

07-19-2012, 06:37 AM	#5
Earl-hickey Undisputed Champion East Side VIP Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 10,024 vCash: 765	Re: Do you consider the WBO to be.... yeah it's just as meaningless as the other 3
Top

07-19-2012, 07:04 AM	#8
Bronxbull666 The Beast From The East ESB Addict Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: In bed Posts: 3,191 vCash: 75	Re: Do you consider the WBO to be.... Ward holds WBA and WBC?
Top

07-19-2012, 09:37 AM	#12
BlackBrenny Champion East Side Guru Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 5,736 vCash: 75	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
Top

07-19-2012, 09:52 AM	#13
slip&counter Gimme some X's and O's East Side VIP Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: In that 3 feet of stew again... Posts: 16,799 vCash: 1000	Re: Do you consider the WBO to be.... It's WHO you fight. Not WHAT you fight for.
Top

07-19-2012, 10:07 AM	#14
Sly Journeyman ESB Jr Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 245 vCash: 1000	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.
Top

07-19-2012, 10:31 AM	#15
Lilo Belt holder ESB Addict Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Hong Kong via Sunderland Posts: 3,605 vCash: 500	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.
Top