Bunce: Matthew Hatton title shot as genuine as Amir Khan's

Why? The titles are vacant for a reason. That's what sets the Ring title aside from the alphabet goons: You have to earn the title rather than be 'awarded' it. I also think that the rankings are fairly consistent and not influenced by GBP.

As for seperating the Ring title from the magazine, I completely agree and I think it's probably the major reason why it isn't recognised as much as it should be. Media outlets might see it as promoting the magazine rather than the title. Seriously, if I were a millionaire, that would be at the top of my agenda:good.

Concerning the 168 rankings, the Kessler-Froch fight could still be for the Ring title, but there are many permutations involved: if Bute doesn't impress, he may lose his #2 ranking; the Ring may decide that the tourney is a scenario where 1 and 2 can't meet, so sanction 1 & 3 for the title (just like the way Wlad got the title). It does has it's flaws, and I am more than aware of them, but it is by far the best system out there, IMO:good.

 

But doesn't that show a major fault of it's policy Dan? You could be waiting years to have top two fighters meet each other. Stubbornly having no title is as bad as having lots. And will people not be sceptical how golden boy's bute stays as number two when the S6 winner has fought far better competition in all likelihood.

 

You're looking for a conspiracy where there isn't one. Read their championship policy, all will become clear. They even covered this issue recently, if it gets to the point where two of the Super Six fighters are rated number's one and two, then they will become champion.

It's a major fault of boxing as a whole that the best don't fight each others, not The Ring's.

 

:deal

The Ring's Championship policy is clear. If the belt is vacant then only a fight between the fighters ranked 1 + 2 (or on very rare occasions, 1 + 3, ala Wlad Klitschko vs Ruslan Chagev) will see a new champion crowned.

Also, I must admit that I was both dubious and cynical as to the Golden Boy takeover of The Ring and the effect it would have on the ratings but, thankfully, I am yet to see anything that looks suspious.

 

So it's good to have five weight divisions with no champ? See the Mosley-Margarito fight not crowning a welterweight champ for an example of where their rules don't work.

 

Sid, that is far, far better than having multiple champs in each division, IMO. As I said, you have to earn the title rather than be awarded or cherry-pick it. For the current state of the alphabets, look at this: [ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_world_boxing_champions[/ame]


I regularly look at this page and it astounds me how bad the alphabet situation amongst the top 4 is, let alone extras like the IBO!

 

I want a Champion to earn the right to be called Champion.

Mosely was rated number 3 and Margarito number 1 so the Championship could have been on the line but seeing as Mosley had lost to the number 2, Miguel Cotto, not long before the Mosely vs Margarito fight, it was deemed that the fight would not be.

I can't see anything wrong with their logic...

 

its not a world title. buncw went down in my book after hearing it.

 

atschRob, your a good guy but how the **** have you got a degree, your so dense sometimes.

 

It is one of many world titles - not the best and not the worst.

Adios.

 

this is worth less than the commonwealth title. face it bunce your in the wrong here.

 

Not as bad as the WBF? :think

 

My dad is an accountant, mum is a hair dresser, i am a blend of the two lol

 

:huh

 

Then Bunce is either an idiot or licking Hatton's ass or maybe both. Bunce's objectivity and relevance has long gone