The Alphabet Boys Dumbest Rule Or Policy?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by surreal deal, Nov 18, 2007.


  1. surreal deal

    surreal deal Liverpool via Krypton Full Member

    7,396
    410
    Jun 16, 2006
    yes but their ignoring of other champions is a policy he finds dumb.that was the question.
     
  2. Shpion

    Shpion IDF Full Member

    2,678
    1
    Feb 9, 2007
    How about when the nonsense "Interim" belt is being awarded without a fight?
     
  3. djm

    djm Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,208
    2
    Dec 17, 2006
    The joke about the interim title, as mentioned, is sanctioning fees. Let's face it, all interim means is "mandatory challenger" + sanctioning fees (and the mandatory part isn't even enforced).

    My personal non-fave is "super champion". Too many belts, too many weight classes fans complain. Ok, we'll create another one. And have a "regular champion". Talk about kissing your sister... congrats... you're the "regular champ" so you have to pay a fee in your next fight.
     
  4. PH|LLA

    PH|LLA VIP Member

    79,438
    2,647
    Feb 1, 2007
    I've already explained why the WBA super champion rule is in fact a good one.
     
  5. pudding

    pudding Active Member Full Member

    1,235
    0
    Apr 24, 2005


    What about the so called champions who hold on to a title and don't defend it? They should be stripped, and the "interim" system is one good way of doing it.


    The worst thing about the sanctioning bodies is that they don't follow their own rules. Every one of them has a clause which allows the board of directors to override the rules for whatever reason. Ordering Sam Peter to face James Toney a second time is one egregious example.
     
  6. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    25,495
    2,177
    Oct 22, 2006
    But as I pointed out, you not going to give credit to the opposition and rate their champion, that is not dumb, it is smart! The title of the thread is dumbest policies ;)
     
  7. Symphenyceo

    Symphenyceo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,778
    40
    Nov 16, 2007
    WBA super champ rule...Complete joke
     
  8. the mean machine

    the mean machine Professional rat catcher Full Member

    254
    0
    Aug 1, 2004
    There is no good reason for having multiple associations and the fact that as soon as someone unifies the titles, they create sub champs instead of disbanding the different titles since everyone agrees who the real champ is.

    As far as not naming other champs in their rankings proves that they like having different champs and it's better business for them. They use the same pool of fighters and they basically are using the same rules, so there is no reason to not recognize them but the prefer playing their little games and extorting money from fighters by running their charade.
     
  9. cuchulain

    cuchulain Loyal Member Full Member

    38,535
    13,341
    Jan 6, 2007
    The concept of having a position in the rankings NOT RATED or VACANT, While there is someone above and below that spot.


    E.g.

    Current IBF rankings.

    Wlad is the Champion

    #1 contender is vacant

    #2 contender is Povetkin.


    Anyone else see a ****-up in the logic here?

    If there is no #1, then the #2 spot becomes the #1 spot.

    And its not just the IBF.

    They all do it from time to time.