Ring Magazine announces Margarito/Mosley will NOT be for the championship

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Rui, Dec 26, 2008.


  1. Jack Presscot

    Jack Presscot Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,489
    1
    Sep 23, 2005
    Oh, thats right, I forgot, Margarito is with the wrong Promoter, he is therefore not raked that high!:yep
     
  2. Cobbler

    Cobbler Shoemaker To The Stars Full Member

    19,216
    2
    Dec 10, 2005

    Which promoter would he have needed to be with to be ranked ahead of someone that had beaten him two fights previously? :?
     
  3. Otodat

    Otodat Active Member Full Member

    564
    0
    Dec 8, 2008
    Um actually, on the other hand, this makes no sense. Quoting from the Wikipedia article on the Ring Magazine title:

    "There are currently only two ways that a boxer can win The Ring's title: defeat the reigning champion; or win a box-off between The Ring's number-one and number-two rated contenders (or, sometimes, number-one and number-three rated). A vacant Ring championship is filled when the number one contender in a weight class battles the number two contender or the number three contender (in cases where The Ring determines that the number two and three contenders are close in abilities and records)."

    If Margarito is beaten by Mosley, then it seems to clearly fulfill that requirement. Maybe I'm missing something here.
     
  4. Jack Presscot

    Jack Presscot Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,489
    1
    Sep 23, 2005
    GBP baby! The Bossman owns the Magazine, and the Ratings System.
     
  5. Cobbler

    Cobbler Shoemaker To The Stars Full Member

    19,216
    2
    Dec 10, 2005
    Can you give some examples?
     
  6. Jack Presscot

    Jack Presscot Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,489
    1
    Sep 23, 2005
    Look how high that has been Hopkins is ranked.
     
  7. Cobbler

    Cobbler Shoemaker To The Stars Full Member

    19,216
    2
    Dec 10, 2005
    He's not ranked ahead of anyone that has beaten him recently.
     
  8. Jack Presscot

    Jack Presscot Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,489
    1
    Sep 23, 2005
    He isnt a Titleholder of any kind, he should not be ranked at all. At least not top 10, but hey, when your head is perenially stuck up the ass of "DE MASSA" then, you get a top 4 ranking.
     
  9. Cobbler

    Cobbler Shoemaker To The Stars Full Member

    19,216
    2
    Dec 10, 2005

    What have titles got to do with anything? He was Ring Champion due to beating their previous champion, then lost one fight, now you want them to rank him below Chris Henry?
     
  10. Jack Presscot

    Jack Presscot Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,489
    1
    Sep 23, 2005
    "WAS" being the key word. If he had beaten Calzaghe, there would be an argument for him being numero uno. Had he beat Kelly at 160, same thing. But he really hasnt done ****.
     
  11. Otodat

    Otodat Active Member Full Member

    564
    0
    Dec 8, 2008
    Ah I see what I was missing. It was the fact that Floyd retired and then the title became vacant, so it HAD to be gotten under the number 1 vs. number 2 (or a close 3) part, and Margarito doesn't fullfill that.
     
  12. Cobbler

    Cobbler Shoemaker To The Stars Full Member

    19,216
    2
    Dec 10, 2005
    Had he beaten Calzaghe he would still be champion...
     
  13. Otodat

    Otodat Active Member Full Member

    564
    0
    Dec 8, 2008
    Actually, I just read the article, and they say that they indeed do have Margarito ranked as No 1. So I don't see any reason why Mosley shouldn't be fighting for the Ring title other than if the title is meant purely for comptetition between the titleholder and the number one contender. Reading the partial rule description in the Wiki, it's not stated there, but I have to assume that that is the case.
     
  14. BOONDOCK SAINT

    BOONDOCK SAINT Active Member Full Member

    568
    0
    Nov 12, 2008
    WHO CARES ABOUT THIS PRIMED MARGO VS. AN OLD MAN:patsch
     
  15. Cobbler

    Cobbler Shoemaker To The Stars Full Member

    19,216
    2
    Dec 10, 2005
    Mosley isn't number two. And as he holds a recent defeat to the person who is number two, there is no justification for using a number one v number three fight to decide the title.