Distinguished columnist Steve Kim exposes Ring Mag., lineal title

RJJ no....and for Vitali, they invoked one of those same rules the ABC's use. Special circumstances.

 

guess i forgot

the WBC did a rule change there as well. I don't consider the Ring as perfect either.

Was Vitali ring champ at some point? i honestly don't remember what their rule change concerning him was

 

What I don't believe is that a fighter from a lower division should be given both designations. Again, stop trying to trick me. It is a waste of your time, and a bit condescending. If you would like to travel that road, go on about your business. There is a major difference in a champion coming up from a division below and getting a title shot or being ranked top 10, and a champion coming up and getting a title shot and taking up a mandatory slot that will allow the current champion to ignore the prior mandatory who worked his way up in the division.

What are you talking about? Casa was stripped without getting a chance to fight his mandatory, they jumped the gun. With Mayweather, they allowed him to ignore his mandatory entirely. If they stripped Casa, they should have stripped Mayweather. I am not for stripping in either case.....but they should be consistant. And that has been my argument all along now hasn't it.

 

I already answered your question. Why are you re-asking it?

 

What I don't get about Steve's article or the recent backlash - Is that the Ring Ratings are decided by a board that go beyond the magazine - Including Maxboxing's own Doug Fischer.

Until there is some obvious case of De La Hoya interfering with the magazine and the policy of the magazine deviates from what it was - I don't see what the issue is until one arises.

I mean - Marquez is a golden boy fighter, and controversy aside - Pacman is still the Jnr Lightweight champ - Where's the beef?

 

Ring actually has that clause right there at the top of their rankings and list EXACTLY when they are capable of invoking it. ONLY for a #1 vs #3 matchup. It is still sneaky IMO. But not like the ABC's.

The ABC's have there's listed in a long list of rules and can invoke "special circumstances" for any number of undisclosed reasons and circumstances.

So neither changed their rules, but one was certainly sneakier about it.

 

He directly talksabout how the rankings and the titles are not to be taken seriously because ODLH owns the magazine, that is an obvious angle in his story.

If you're talking about the rules that the belt is goverened by - There is a advisory baord made up of journo's and others from a slew of web, print and media sources that include Doug Fischer - Change the policies through the independant group...

My point is that before DLH was around - The policy was set - It's only dodgy to me if they breach their own policy to favour a Golden Boy Fighter - If they go outside the boundaries that have been set since the title was re-introduced.

 

Get approval from the board. And there is the problem. A fighter works his way up to top ranked status, and the champion doesn't have to fight him but can fight the champion from the lower division. They decide said champion ALSO fills his mandatory because they have moved him into the top 10 for no reason and this is enough to bump him aside. And because of other rules, the fighter who fought his way to the top must now wait another YEAR to fight for the title. Now why exactly is this ok?

You assume incorrectly. Hatton had vacated that belt and division. He won his JWW title back and was a JWW. So to fill a mandatory status AND be top 10 is simply wrong. The rules allow for him to be because he is ranked top 10? That's something wrong with the rule itself. And isn't that what I have been saying all along? He should never be "voted" a mandatory over another fighter when the defense can be viewed as optional forcing Mayweather to fight a WW after that. They had multiple options, and the WBC chose the wrong one.

As far as Mayweather-Mosley, they allowed for Mayweather to claim retirement AND keep his status as champion. Mosley tried to get his mandatory obligation granted, and Mayweather turned him down. The WBC made no move to force Mayweather to face him (which by their rules he was supposed to face him next no matter what), unlike what they did with Casamayor. So Mosley moved on. Big difference in the Casamayor situation who was immediately pressured into fighting an unknown fighter LONG before the deadline to fight him was even up.

 

Yes, but it certainly doesn't mean their rules should be subjective and inconsistant.