Khan Peterson to be for the RING Championship belt

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by iron_chin, May 3, 2012.


Page 1 of 2
  1. iron_chin

    iron_chin Boxing Addict banned

    6,645
    0
    Jun 12, 2011
    ring have changed there rules due to so amny vacant spots for champions and best not fighting the best,
     
    iron_chin, May 3, 2012
    iron_chin, May 3, 2012
    #1
  2. iron_chin

    iron_chin Boxing Addict banned

    6,645
    0
    Jun 12, 2011
    The fact that THE RING has championship vacancies in 11 of the 17 weight divisions is stark evidence that the Nos. 1- and 2-rated fighters rarely face one another in the modern boxing era.

    The goal of THE RING has always been to determine the true champion in every division. Clearly, the long-standing policy has not been effective at meeting this objective.

    The editors at THE RING had two choices – do nothing, which would perpetuate the status quo, or take action.

    After many long discussions, we decided to update our Championship Policy in an effort to encourage top fighters to face one another and create more championship fights while maintaining the high standards long associated with THE RING.

    “We didn’t want to sit back and continue to say, in effect, ‘Oh, well. We can’t force these guys to fight each other so there’s nothing we can do,’” said Michael Rosenthal, Editor of THE RING Magazine.

    “We believe we’ve come up with a new policy that will pump more life into the sport and hopefully motivate the best to fight the best, which is what fans deserve.”

    Here’s a look at the updated policy:

    NEW CHAMPIONSHIP POLICY

    Championship vacancies can be filled in the following two ways:

    1. THE RING’s Nos. 1 and 2 contenders fight one another.

    2. If the Nos. 1 and 2 contenders choose not to fight one another and either of them fights No. 3, No. 4 or No. 5, the winner may be awarded THE RING belt.

    CHAMPIONSHIP RETENTION

    THE RING also wants to encourage its champions to face worthy opponents. With that in mind, here are the six situations in which a champion may lose his belt:

    1. The Champion loses a fight in the weight class in which he is champion.

    2. The Champion moves to another weight class.

    3. The Champion does not schedule a fight in any weight class for 18 months.

    4. The Champion does not schedule a fight at his championship weight for 18 months (even if he fights at another weight).

    5. The Champion does not schedule a fight with a Top-5 contender from any weight class for two years.

    6. The Champion retires.
     
    iron_chin, May 3, 2012
    iron_chin, May 3, 2012
    #2
  3. FloydPatterson

    FloydPatterson Boxing Addict banned

    6,610
    3
    Apr 6, 2012
    All the better for peterson to whoop khans ass
     
    FloydPatterson, May 3, 2012
    FloydPatterson, May 3, 2012
    #3
  4. BigReg

    BigReg Broad Street Bully Full Member

    38,117
    5
    Jun 26, 2007
    Ring Magazine just lost even more integrity. They are a defacto sanctioning body. They're already making up rules left and right, making nonsensical rulings, and now it looks like they are going to start stripping fighters. It's only a matter of time before they start assessing fees to the fighters.
     
    BigReg, May 3, 2012
    BigReg, May 3, 2012
    #4
  5. benner

    benner Active Member Full Member

    982
    0
    Apr 22, 2012
    They are the top 3 guys in the division plus Bradley avoided a match with Khan.
     
    benner, May 3, 2012
    benner, May 3, 2012
    #5
  6. iron_chin

    iron_chin Boxing Addict banned

    6,645
    0
    Jun 12, 2011
    ye, bradley ducked khan.
     
    iron_chin, May 3, 2012
    iron_chin, May 3, 2012
    #6
  7. KiD Caiman

    KiD Caiman Prospect Full Member

    763
    1
    Jan 21, 2012
    The No. 3 rule for Championship retention is useless.

    The new set of 'Retention' rules are for the better, but the top 2 vs any of the top 5 is bull****. I think it should be among any of the top 3 because the Ring division rankings are subjectively done anyway. But now No.2 and No.5 can qualify. Garbage.
     
    KiD Caiman, May 3, 2012
    KiD Caiman, May 3, 2012
    #7
  8. Mr. Minmon

    Mr. Minmon Member Full Member

    478
    1
    Apr 27, 2012
    I see no problem with this. Bradley already avoided Khan for a Pac fight. Plus Peterson and Khan are currently the top 2 guys in their division, what with Alexander and Bradley both campaigning at 147 now.
     
    Mr. Minmon, May 3, 2012
    Mr. Minmon, May 3, 2012
    #8
  9. pirao666

    pirao666 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,327
    2
    Jun 18, 2011
    I like the idea actually. If it's clear that #1 is ducking #2 or vice versa, something must be done.
     
    pirao666, May 3, 2012
    pirao666, May 3, 2012
    #9
  10. Nonito Smoak

    Nonito Smoak Ioka>Lomo, sorry my dudes Full Member

    53,088
    6,686
    Sep 8, 2010
    The new rules suck.

    Lineages mean less now. They were always sometimes misleading, but now mean less.
     
    Nonito Smoak, May 3, 2012
    Nonito Smoak, May 3, 2012
    #10
  11. Momus

    Momus Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,732
    2,571
    Nov 27, 2010
    Keeping the title vacant is the lesser evil compared to diluting the value of a "true champion". If the top 2 fighters won't face each other, then the championship should remain vacant. It preserves the prestige, and makes winning the title mean something.
     
    Momus, May 3, 2012
    Momus, May 3, 2012
    #11
  12. Bajingo

    Bajingo Boxing Junkie banned

    14,050
    0
    Nov 15, 2009
    I'd be surprised if Bradley ever fights at 140 again, this is the right thing to do.
     
    Bajingo, May 3, 2012
    Bajingo, May 3, 2012
    #12
  13. bazza12

    bazza12 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,561
    5
    Sep 26, 2009
    The Ring aren't doing this for financial gains, so lets take a step back here.

    They are basically saying that wherebye if 1 of the top 2 fighters in a division is either money or alphabet title driven, others within the top 5 (who can I just point out tend to be quality operators, the Ring's rankings are pretty decent) can fight for the belt?

    I think its good. At the moment the Ring belt needs more creditibility, this opens the belt up to a few more contenders without making it available to literally everyone and his grandmother. The more opportunity to fight for it, the more people win it and own Ring belts and wish to defend it, the more fights between top 5 contenders.

    Generally I'd say this is a step in the right direction as far as I'm concerned, certainly nothing to worry about.
     
    bazza12, May 3, 2012
    bazza12, May 3, 2012
    #13
  14. bballchump11

    bballchump11 2011 Poster of the Year Full Member

    63,174
    24
    Oct 27, 2010
    ya that's what I was thinking to a lesser extent. It seems like they'll abuse their power now and make bs fights for the title. I like the idea of Khan/Peterson being for the title, but it doesn't start a good trend
     
    bballchump11, May 3, 2012
    bballchump11, May 3, 2012
    #14
  15. SweetHome_Bama

    SweetHome_Bama Loyal Member banned

    32,270
    3
    Apr 30, 2010
    I don't like the rule change, no reason for it, and if people didn't want to do what it takes to be the Ring champ, good, shows they didn't have what it takes.
     
    SweetHome_Bama, May 3, 2012
    SweetHome_Bama, May 3, 2012
    #15
Page 1 of 2