Is the Ring title the only legit title?

Not when the other titles are unified

 

.....and that poll was opened 6 months after they fought.
Just a popularity contest by then, with the real boxing fans of the forum not caring to debate on the fight any longer.
If you held a poll today, it would probably have Pac getting about 75 % of the votes.....

The early polls in the days right after the fight in every boxing forum including this one all had JMM winning by significant margins.
......in the Classic forum the diparity was nearly 2 out of every 3 posters of the opinion that Marquez had beaten Pacquiao.

 

Not to mention that every Poll involvng Pac(always started by *******s) gets at least 100 pro-votes by default.

 

So, as a Holyfield fan, you would have supported the Ring Magazine (not sure if they were around at the time or when they folded for a while) giving Lennox Lewis the Ring belt after the draw with Holy, purely because it was a bogus decision?

You've kind of touched on the real issue for me with the Ring belt. They're parasites. They live off the work of other organisations (no matter how **** they may be),and then produce their own message from the mountain.

The Ring has ZERO influence on fights, promoting, matchmaking, mandatories etc, so they get to do the easy job. Sit around after the real work is done, scratch their arse, work out who the current GBP fighters are, then come up with some rankings.

The Ring magazine belt is the equivalent of the Womens Weekly best dressed award.

 

I respect the Ring title more than the others for the moment, I don't see any huge influence that ODLH is having with ownership of the magazine.

 

Yeah I remember the opinions being very close.

I scored it for Pacman.

It was a close, but not indefensible decision.

Keith

 

I think the Ring made a good call when the Klitschko-Chagaev fight was for the title. But I think the Ring can get away with decisions that would cause an uproar if the alphabet bodies made the same decisions with their belts and titleists

 

Lewis clearly won that fight, and so yes, if I were running "Ring Magazine", I'd have Lewis as the Ring Champion, and Holyfield at #2 at that particular time.

Now, there was a rematch after that fight......lets say like I did, the majority of journalist at the magazine had Holyfield the winner for the Lewis rematch......then even though the fight was awarded to Lewis, the Ring would be within its rights to pronounce Holyfield the Champion again of their "Ring" belt.

I wish the Ring would do it that way, they would be alot more credible if they pronounced the winner of their "Ring" belt, someone their own journalist thought was the winner of the fight.
.....but instead, they go along with the corruption that exists within the alphabet groups and take their decisions at face value.......
.......thus "The Ring" becomes only a puppet to the Alphabet groups.

 

Agreed.

 

Fighters make the titles, titles don't make the fighter.
Whatever belt Wladamir has is the legit HW title.
He's the man to beat.

 

He's not what he was a few years ago.

 

Vitali is the best HW in my eyes and has always been better than little bro. Although you're right that he's not as good at he was before his layoff, and Wlad has been getting better.

So right now the gap is smaller but Vitali is still better than Wlad.

Whatever title Wlad has doesn't mean ****.