And you are officially one of them. Congratulations. Was that what you were shooting for ... to land somewhere between the WBA and the WBO? Have a nice day.
Of course? Independent rankings unfettered by any financial transaction between fighter and organisation (or customer and service provider); a wider representation than had ever been achieved in terms of nationalities at the input stage; a faster turnaround than any rankings organisation in the world achieved at the time of its founding. All of these things have been achieved. We've already seen the WBA top ten, and it upset you, so we won't have that again. THE WBO rank Terence Crawford at number one so no help for you there They don't have Pacquiao or Spence in their top ten. I don't think even someone as silly as you could begin to make a meaningful comparison, but as we know, you won't even try. Thanks for the fantasies.
You are a ratings board, not a governing board. You rate fighters ... that is your "Supposed" mission. It isn't your mission to "govern" fighters and tell them who and when to fight. If you feel everyone in that top 10 welterweight rankings is BETTER than Manny Pacquaio, so be it. If you don't believe those are the 10 best welterweights ... and you have omitted some because they didn't follow your rules ... then you have failed as a ratings board. That's all.
Wtf are you arguing? TTR don´t rank Manny due to his inactivity. He spent over a year on the sidelines without anything lined up. It´s completely reasonable. How is not ranking an inactive fighter a dumb policy? Why are you so salty about this? And I don´t get why you are dragging Beterbiev(who fought this year) and Briedis (who fought last year) into this. TBR currently ranks Spence and Bud as their top two guys. Pacquiao was ranked at nr. 3 back in 09/02/21(removed due to inactivity). TBR only recognize a "champion" if the top 2 guys face off. You recognize the WBO and the rest of the ABC´s, regardless of their blatant corruption and disregard of the sport. Yet some site sticks to some strict, yet reasonable rules, and you loose your ****ing mind. Get a grip.
Also, these are Ring Magazine rules: Championship vacancies can be filled in the following two ways: THE RING’s Nos. 1 and 2 contenders fight one another. If a fight between the Nos. 1 and 2 contenders can not be made and No. 1 fights No. 3, the winner may be awarded THE RING belt if the Editorial Board deems the No. 3 contender worthy. Here are the seven situations in which a champion can lose his belt: The Champion loses a fight in the weight class in which he is champion. The Champion moves to another weight class (for more than one fight). The Champion does not schedule a fight in any weight class for 18 months. The Champion does not schedule a fight at his championship weight for 18 months (even if he fights at another weight). The Champion does not schedule a fight with a Top-5 contender from any weight class for two years. The Champion retires. The Champion tests positive for a performance-enhancing substance and is fined, suspended or otherwise penalized by the proper authority (athletic commission or sanctioning body). Note how a Ring Magazine champion can loose their belt if they don´t schedule a fight for 18 months. Yet @Dubblechin can´t fathom that TBR had the audacity to drop Manny for over 19 months of inactivity/not scheduling a fight. RING states that a champion can loose their RING belt for those 18 months, but they will keep Manny ranked. Stop defending this BS.
Nobody has tried to tell any fighters "who and when to fight". What's wrong with you? That's more pure fantasy. Stripping fighters for inactivity is absolutely normal, there is nothing wrong with it, and you hysterical obsession with it is insane. Our success and failure as a ratings board and the circumstances that decide it is lain out in black and white in public and includes removal of fighters from rankings for inactivity and has absolutely nothing to do with a person as strange as yourself. Your weird opinion that inactive fighters can remain in a ranking for years and years is extreme and absurd and I reject it utterly.
Yes, this will go down as a "world" title fight. And on the SAME ****ING CARD, you will have Ugas defending his "world" title. 2 months later you will have Bud defending his "world title."
You are not a governing body. You are a ratings body. People look to ratings bodies for RATINGS. If you think those are the 10 best welterweights in the world, fine. If you and your board honestly believe Jamal James is better than Manny Pacquiao and deserves be rated higher, good luck with that. But if you admit those ARE NOT the 10 best welterweights in the world ... and you've left better fighters off because of internal policies ... what good are you? Then yours are just another batch of inaccurate ratings. Fans don't want more of the same. RATE the 10 best in each division and get the hell out of the way. Enough POLICY nonsense. If you don't believe those are the 10 best welterweights ... and you have omitted some because they didn't follow your rules ... Then you have FAILED as a ratings board.
Why are you so hell bent against a fighter being removed due to activity? If Pacquiao wins he'll be rated as the number 1 WW in the world, the winner of him vs Crawford will be considered the WW champion by everyone then. If Spence wins he continues to be rated the number 1 WW in the world, the winner of him vs Crawford will be considered the WW champion by everyone then. But two guys who won't fight Crawford, who'd both be an underdog to Crawford, fighting each other for a new World Championship, surely you have to see the issue there.
Professional boxing is prize fighting. Amateur boxing is a sport. Fighters turn professional in order to fight for money. Hence the names 'amateur' and 'professional'. I have already covered in the thread how low a percentage of fighters actually make good money from boxing and why these minor titles are important for them. If you are WBC champion then you have surpassed all rivals in the WBC. And so on. The identification is in the prefix.
I don't know, maybe I'd just like to see ratings from a ratings board that list the 10 best fighters in a division. LOL
And of those people, you are the first to express such abject misery at the notion of a fighter being removed for inactivity. In fact, you are the most weirdly obsessed person I have ever talked to under any circumstances I think those are the ten best active welterweights in the world. What are you talking about? We are NOT the same! That's your whole, baffling, obsessed point, isn't it? Ring Magazine and WBA continue to rank Manny, but we don't - we're different from them. Look - at the very least, surely you have to start actually responding to my posts? You must have ducked 20 questions in the course of this discussion, all while I address your feverish rambling in detail. Instead, you just quote a post (or don't) then repeat yourself, ad nauseum. You honestly sound quite mad at this point. This post is almost exactly the same as your last one I can literally respond to you just by copying and pasting my last response, to which you have not responded. That's more pure fantasy. Our success and failure as a ratings board and the circumstances that decide it is lain out in black and white in public and includes removal of fighters from rankings for inactivity and has absolutely nothing to do with a person as strange as yourself.
For how many years? If a fighter is ranked number 2 at 147lbs in 2016, fights in 2017 at 140lbs, 2018-2021 at 154lbs, then in 2022 at 140lbs and wins every one of those fights. At which point are you removing him from the 147lbs rankings? Or never? A fighter that hasn't fought in seven years at 147 but is pound-for-pound number one and would CLEARLY be one of the best at 147 if he fought there, but doesn't fight there, when is he removed by someone trying to express to the fans who is the ten best 147lb fighters in the world?
Quit trying to write a NEW policy about how many fights per year someone needs ... JUST rate the 10 best fighters in each division and move on. Good Lord.
Just, for once, answer a question. When can an active fighter who has not fought in a division in which he has historic success be removed from that division's rankings, in your opinion?