Do you rate the Ring magazine belt ?

I rate the Ring belt higher than those of the corrupt alphabet organisations.

 

I don't have a problem with you ignoring it now as I agree the rule changes were ridiculous. But fighters that won them before the rules changes should not be ignored.

 

The championship claims of Klitschko and Hernandez should be ignored, as I explained.

 

The Ring's new policy is pretty good except for one key component; the part where a vacany can be filled by the number 1 or number 2 guys fighting the number 3,4, or 5 guy. With that being said, a strict 1 vs. 2 policy is not without its holes. I don't see how it's so much more fair to tell Wladimir that he can't be the real champ unless and he and his brother agree to fight eachother. Why is it fair to say Mayweather can't be champ unless he beats Marquez even though he already beat Marquez and even though Marquez has publically stated that he doesn't want to fight Mayweather again?

At the end of the day, this stuff is all subjective anyway. There's always going to be someone new claiming that their rankings are pure. Of course, if people actually start paying real attention to them and abide by them, then they will eventually become like the other organizations that everyone claims is so corrupt.

 

"Just as real or more so" despite being arbitrary rankings by magazine writers and not in fact a sanctioning body?

 

Yoan Pablo
Mikey Garcia
Danny Garcia

These three all hold the Ring title, but in my opinion are clearly not the Lineal Champions.

It all comes down to personal opinion. You could recognize a fighter as lineal, I could recognize a different fighter as lineal, and the Ring could recognize a different fighter as lineal. It all comes down to if you ranked two fighters #1 and #2 in a division when they fought.

 

Though this a digression, it's pretty amazing that the lineal flyweight championship can be traced back almost 40 years!

 

Sanctioning bodies that have been caught on tape taking bribes? That are in bed with certain promoters? I don't like The Ring's new policy but before all the changes they were as credible as we could get. Nothing is ever 100% perfect. In a perfect world we would go back to 8 Divisions and 1 champion per division. Won't ever happen though.

 

You're right, Pacquiao wasn't number 2, because he had only beaten Oscar at welter.

I see at least the cyberboxingzone did consider Margarito-Mosley to be for the vacant lineal championship. This is one occasion where the rewarding of a vacant "legitimate" championship can be subjective, because it depended on whether Mosley was considered number 2 or not. Margarito would have been 3 or 4 before he fought Cotto, then moved to 1 when he beat him. The Ring only dropped Cotto to number 2, but if someone felt the loss should move Cotto further down, then they would make Mosley number 2. I agree with the Ring in this case. Cotto had a run of top wins at welter before losing to Margarito, while Mosley's most significant win at welterweight in seven years was over Luis Collazo. I think the reason some media and fans considered Margarito-Mosley to be for the vacant legit championship is because too many overrated one big win, and it wasn't fair to Cotto to do so.

So... while I don't accept it I actually think the better argument to be made for a Ring champ not recognised as such by the TBRB would be Mayweather, not Klitschko. Klitschko never beat a contender who had a better case to be number 2 than Vitali, but Mayweather's victory over Mosley, though definitely not his victory over Guerrero, can be argued to give him a claim as legimate welter champion.

 

i agree with your viewpoint, that being said there is no doubt
that Wlad is the champion of the HW division. There can be
a case made that Yoan Pablo and Danny shouldn't have been
crowned but not Wlad.

 

"The sanctioning bodies are corrupt" - however valid that statement is - doesn't itself make a strong argument to anoint some random arbitrary belt & rankings cooked up on the whim of some magazine writers as being more credible than any genuine sanctioning body.

That's like saying "I don't like the government or the way they use our military, so I'm going to join the militia of Crackhead Jimmy who lives in a box in the alley declaring himself Lord Regent and myself a citizen of New Skidrow... :nut"

 

The case is obviously that Wlad didn't beat Vitali, number 2. It's a unique circumstance that it might seem reasonable to make an exception for, but if you think a vacant championship should strictly be crowned when the number 1 and number 2 fight, then Wlad isn't champion.

 

I probably should've been more skeptical about the Ring championship from the beginning. They're a business who make decisions to make money, so there was a risk of conflict of interest even before they were bought by Golden Boy. The quality and direction of the magazine has varied over the years, as they've been under different ownerships and been headed by different editors (though I think it was pretty good under Nigel Collins). But they're not some great honourable boxing institution! Are you aware of the 1977 Ring scandal? It was the Ring rankings at the time that contributed to the proliferation of sanctioning bodies. The Ring rankings have done more harm than good to the sport.

http://theboxingtribune.com/2011/03/revisiting-the-ring-magazine-scandal/