F*** The WBA, and their sister the WBC

1) is doubtful
2) is debatable! :yep

 

HBO does not care about the Ring Belt. And that is an unfortunate problem.

If HBO, along with the other networks, got on board with the Ring Belt it could change the sport over time.

 

Yeah, Ring allowing Adamek vs. Bobby Gunn for the title is SOOOOO much more credible...... :roll:

 

yes i agree **** the wbc and the wba.....to me they are the worst of the bodies......ibf and wbo are ok......

i've said numerous times i wish the IBO would get more legitmacy.....they have non-biased computer rankings, and on there website seem to be pretty accurate, and most of their belt holders, seem to be the elite or top tier guys in most cases.....

 

The difference being, The Ring wouldn't have stripped him if he didn't.

 

Both of them do their fair share of stupid ****.

I'd say all the titles are pretty flimsy in nature. The Ring Title is just something people grab onto because it has four letters and not three. They think it's really semantics at this point.

The WBO, WBC, WBA, IBF AND The Ring are all as corrupt as one another. The thing is some of them hide it better.

 

weak, dude.

Ring doesn't charge sanctioning fees. It's a completely different circumstance.

 

The thing I look for is consistency. Over the last few years at least, it seems the IBF and WBO are the two that consistently apply the rules, no matter if it costs them money in doing so.

The WBA and WBC just make the rules up as they go along. And if they cant get around the rules, they just invent a new title to give someone.

Ring to me isnt a true championship title, because the champ has no requirements on defending it. He can fight whomever he chooses, whenever he chooses. Expecting the promoters and fighters to "police themselves" in regards to making defenses against top competition is just ******ed. A guy could be ranked #1 by Ring and NEVER get the title shot.

 

what exactly does sanctioning fees have to do with Bobby Gunn fighting for the Ring CW title? And if by some miracle Gunn actually WON it, he could fight slob after slob for the next 5 years and never get stripped.

 

I disagree. I've seen the WBO pull out a lot of BS from their pockets. I mean Michael Jennings was fighting for the WW title against Cotto. We had The Pocket Rocket Gary Lockett against Pavlik and so on and so forth.

 

isn't that exactly what Zsolt Erdei has been doing?

 

Like it or not, those guys were in the rankings. Exactly what rule was violated?

Not every mandatory defense is going to be Jones-Tarver or Taylor-Pavlik. It just doesnt work like that. But you also have to give credit where credit is due. The WBO forced Juan Diaz to fight either Katsidis or Nate, and now the WBO is forcing Bradley to fight either Nate or Lamont Peterson. And since everyone is so high on Ring, its probably worth noting that of the 5 actual Ring champions, 3 of them happen to be current WBO champions as well......

 

its to confusing with all these belts!! To difficult for regular fans and newcomers to the sport to keep up with whos the champion. ****ing ridiculouse!!

 

Why don't we all just choose one instead of four? Which from your choices is either the ring or ibf. The wbo is **** and always has been, everybody who recognises that title should be ****ing ashamed, because it's **** and just for wanting to make three become four when two is too many.

 

to an extent, but look at the WBO rankings at 175.

1. Bernard Hopkins
2. Roy Jones
3 Aleksy Kuziemski
4. Glen Johnson

I guarantee you 3 of the top 4 wouldnt fight Erdie even if it went to purse bid, because HBO and Showtime would probably pass, and they would worry about Erdie's promoter winning the bid and having the fight in Germany............