Do the American media still ignore the WBO?

C'mon you know you want to flip your switch!!!

 

The question was a bit lame. Of course they don't ignore the WBO.... they put several WBO Championship fights on.... and call them Championship fights... so, I don't understand how they would be ignored. Miguel Cotto was one of the most heavily televised Champions by HBO, and he was a WBO Champion. Same goes for Calzaghe on Showtime, and he was the WBO Champion. Hell, they were billing Oscar vs Hopkins as a unification fight, when Hopkins held the IBF, WBA, and WBC, and Oscar held only the WBO. A lot of American Media were pushing the point of it being the first time that all 4 world Championship belts would be unified. Klitschko was also followed, and televised heavily when he was the WBO Champion.

 

IBF has been a joke for a long time IMO

 

The WBO has grown in stature while the others have declined. It's pretty much on a par with the others now. You could even make a decent argument to say that he has surpassed the IBF now as that is an organisation that has been weak for a couple of years now.

 

The Ring Magazine doesn't. It sends out a yearly Almanac which shows how all the championships over the many years have passed hands and when (basically the history of each belt in each weight class, exept the WBO.) The only time it mentions Joe Cal's name is when he took the IBF from Lacy.

 

A Trinket of no real value.