Danny Green.... Open letter to RJJ

Just to add to that Ash, the title below the Super Champ should have an appropriate name, not 'World Championship' which is just fundamentally wrong.

Can't even suggest what it should really be called, but money, greed and deception will ensure it remains 'World Champion'.

This is what always leads us oldies harking back to the days when there was only the WBA & WBC.

When the IBF first turned up it was viewed with the same suspicion as organisations 5 & 6 are these days.

...can you see where the frustration stems from Ash?

...and that's why it's so hard, and often very wrong, to compare old time 'real' titleholders (the ones who beat the champ to become the champ) with some of todays 'champions'.

 

"The smile still creases my face at the thought of those glorious 122 seconds that made a nation cheer." atsch

 

Yes I can see how it would be hard to seperate SRR and choc in the ATG status :yep

Yeah look I know what your saying but I dont think anybody here is thinking choc is p4p anything....and as Flash said if the titles were there any fighter would take them.

 

c'mon mate all article before he fought Mundine stated how great he felt under Salas with regards to diet etc.boxing is a business he moved up because he lost to the weakest SMW champion and was flogged by Mundine.he had no future at SMW.same as Mundine dropping to MW when Kessler became his mandatory.

 

theres only 20 to 40 regular posters in the Aussie section.

 

You'd be surprised by some of the people who read what goes on here.

 

maybe i would but seriously do you think someone would join an internet forum to further their fighters agendas? i
mean i disagree with his reasoning for Mundine dropping to MW but he believes it.opinions vary.

 

The fact remains that mundine is a world class boxer (no matter how people try to muddy that water) and that he still has sufficient pop to hurt opponents (see geale, medley) at middleweight, because he doesn't "starch" them means nothing in the grand scheme of boxing.

You couldn't either understand the question or realised giving the right answer would make you clown yourself even more, honestly everything you write is bizarre, did you read Rodin's post?

I honestly believe you need a more simple sport to follow, that's not me saying it to be nasty either, it's friendly advice :good

Taking off the rose coloured spectacles may help, I honestly cannot see why people would choose to read about fights that they can't watch and spend their time squinting at grainy black and white footage when amazing fights are taking place every month and the talent level in the sport is at an all time high.

 

'The talent level in the sport is at an all time high'.

True, we have more world champs than ever so thats a healthy sign.

 

LMAO... Things are going too bloody well.

 

"The fact remains that mundine is a world class boxer (no matter how people try to muddy that water) and that he still has sufficient pop to hurt opponents (see geale, medley) at middleweight, because he doesn't "starch" them means nothing in the grand scheme of boxing."

I guess there is not much point in debating "World class", but to me, for a fighter to be in that catagory, he has to fight a currant international proven fighter.
IMO, Choc acquired that mantle by going the distance with Kessler, however the standard of opponent since then has him right on the border.
He's probably the best National fighter fighter here, but that's a long way from the elite in the division.

His present rating as a middleweight is farcical. He beat Geale to get it, Much as I like Daniel's skills, he has also no real international competition on his scorecard.

If you disagree with these standards, I guess it's a stalemate.

 

Personally I don't agree, but I do appreciate the well thought out logic and response.

 

How does a fighter qualify as world class to you?

 

If his name is Mundine and he jerks off over his fights daily then he must be world class.

 

It's certianly a subjective call Rodin. There's no definative criteria, so it's hard to draw a line in the sand for these classifications.

There are champions in every era, but it's hard to compare 'real' titleholders (the ones who beat the champ to become the champ) of days gone by with some of todays 'opportunist champions'. And it's hardly the fault of these later guys when there's a 'championship' belt on every street corner.

In any era if you beat the real champ (ie a reigning champ of a credible organisation who is not the guy below the Super Champ) you become a real world champion IMO.

It's long forgotten now, but the original conotation of World Champion was of course THE BEST IN THE WORLD, and how many best in the world's in one weight division can there really be at one point in time?