you obviously dont need the WBO to be undisputed, just like it's not mandatory to have the WBC, IBF, or WBA to be called undisputed, although it helps. but hey, whatever makes you feel better
You seem to be taking this awfully personally. I would have thought most fans would agree that it's better to recognise less belts. Also, if you recognise WBO then you would need the belt to be undisputed otherwise someone is disputing your claim.
personally? naw, just talking some boxing. but like i said, you can believe whatever you'd like. and again, you dont need all recognized belts to be undisputed. :good
Yes you do. The definition of undisputed means that no-one can dispute your claim. If you recognise the WBO as a legitimate title and someone else is holding it then they're disputing your claim. That isn't boxing, it's correct semantics.
but we're talking boxing, and as you can see, the WBO is recognized whether you like it or not. When the WBO is involved with WBC, WBA, or IBF, you will hear UNIFICATION. It is what it is, whether you agree or disagree.
To counter your point Return, if Haye had the WBO belt, along with the WBC & WBA but not the IBF, why was he called the 'undisputed' champion at cruiserweight. It's a recognised world title, get over it.
Yes but being unified and undisputed are two different things. Are you trying to tell me that words from the English dictionary are different when used within boxing? Haye was called the undisputed champion because he had won the title from Mormeck who had been considered the undisputed champion depsite being stripped of the IBF title. Maccarinelli had no claim to the title, the WBO was irrelavent. Saying "it's a recognised title, get over it" makes you sound like a child who is unable to converse on an intellectual level. I consider Vic the true champion with Montiel the top contender because of his outstanding work at super fly.
Yes but being unified and undisputed are two different things. Are you trying to tell me that words from the English dictionary are different when used within boxing? This content is protected Haye was called the undisputed champion because he had won the title from Mormeck who had been considered the undisputed champion depsite being stripped of the IBF title. Maccarinelli had no claim to the title, the WBO was irrelavent. Saying "it's a recognised title, get over it" makes you sound like a child who is unable to converse on an intellectual level. This content is protected I consider Vic the true champion with Montiel the top contender because of his outstanding work at super fly. This content is protected This content is protected
The fighter makes the belt anyway.Don't tell me Ivan Calderon ain't a champion cuz he has the WBO title
Personally I would refer to Haye as the universally recognised crusierweight champion of the world because he didn't officially hold all three belts. O'Neill Bell became undisputed cruiserweight champion when he beat Mormeck to add his WBC and WBA titles to his IBF belt. Again there was no WBO involved here. I think you've misunderstood my bit about Vic and Montiel but nevermind. It's always good to discuss these things. No beef.
He does hold recognition as champion with The Ring which I pay a lot of credence to. I don't think holding the WBO on it's own makes you a champion though. You can be number one in the division, but that doesn't mean you are a champion.
Whatever it's your opinion but I recognize the title and most people do and it's a unification for us the weird people who recognize it.:tong