a question about the champion retaining the title by draw

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by good right hand, Jul 29, 2007.


  1. good right hand

    good right hand Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,876
    10
    Jul 26, 2004
    i was wondering if it was just me or would it also make sense for the title to become vacant and decided after a immediate rematch.

    maybe it wouldent be fair to champions as it would have broken title streaks like eusibio pedroza's 19 title defenses.
     
  2. Titan1

    Titan1 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,672
    2,546
    Oct 18, 2004
    But in the case of Dokes-Weaver II, the perfect solution.Maybe it would've woke Dokes' ass up and made him get serious.
     
  3. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    20,862
    138
    Jul 6, 2007
    In my opinion draws are so rarely draws, in the event of a true draw, there should be a mandated rematch in title fights.
     
  4. Boom_Boom

    Boom_Boom R.I.P Boxing 6/9/12 Full Member

    38,281
    13
    Sep 21, 2006
    "To be the champ you have to beat the champ"
     
  5. andyZOR

    andyZOR Obsessed with Boxing banned

    17,049
    2
    Feb 28, 2007
    Agreed.


    Golora Byrd II should of happened.
     
  6. theunderdog

    theunderdog Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,814
    1
    Jul 4, 2006
    dude, i think the thread starter asked if the title should be vacated after a draw. he didnt say anything like the challenger should win the belt with a draw or something. your post doesn't make much sense
     
  7. psychopath

    psychopath D' "X" Factor Full Member

    26,390
    2
    Mar 13, 2007
    It's not on breaking title defense or anything . . . it's very simple technically. If the fight is a "draw" then it's a "status quo'. Means . . . no changes . . . no movement. The Champ remains the champ and the challenger remains the challenger. Now if the title is vacant and the fight for the title is a draw . . . the title remains vacant.