So which boxing sanctioning body do you see as the least credible as of the moment?

istmeno · Oct 3, 2008

BigBone said:

WBC BY FAR and let me tell you why:

-Dozens of interim titles meaning a lot more santcioning fees
-multiple eliminators in one division (Juan Carlos Gomez had to win 3 of them and still not getting a world title fight)
-world title opportunity for mexican Oscar Larios after suffering brain damage in the Linares fight, getting banned permanently from every US ring
-stripping of Casamayor therefore Mexican Morales could fight David Diaz (interim champ) for the full LW title (it was important for Morales' 4th division title). When Casamayor threatened to file a lawsuit, they gave him an interim belt just to shut the **** up
-laughable decisions on controversial fight (Soto DQ by WBC-delegated referee Joe Cortez - decision remained but the title wasn't given to Lorenzo. What the **** is that?) remember sulaiman also stated that the title belonged to the wbc and that he was under no obligation to abide by th decision of the boxing commission.
-champion emeritus status allowing Vitali Klitschko to fight for the title after 4 years of inactivity despite others winning several eliminators
-overruling own judges' decisions (like mandatory rematch after Peter-Toney 1 - they were the WBC's OWN judges and the WBC said it was controversial, make another one)
-breaking their own rules and regulations (Jameel McCline's HW title opportunity while not ranked in the 15). Can I fight for the HW title as well?
-DLH vs. Mayorga (DLH came back from a MW loss and a 2-year layoff to fight Mayorga who got the title fighting after a loss at MW). Can I fight for the LMW title as well?
-discrediting local commissions and laws (Biloxi incident)
-stipping and ordering mandatories are based on relationship with Don Jose Sulaiman (Castillejo was interim 154 champ for years, Dawson was never stripped despite ducking Diaconu)
-the Rocchigiani case (BTW if Rocky decides not to make a deal with the WBC the court rule would've ruined the whole organization)
Click to expand...

you forgot making andre "i haven't fought anyone in the top 15" berto against miguel ange " neither have i" rodriguez. the top cvontenders for mayweathers vacated title.

UndisputedUK · Oct 3, 2008

The vacant WBO shots and number 1 positions in each division are gifted to a lot of UK fighters. Nicky Cook had a good fight against Alex Arthur, won the WBO title, but this is light years away from Lloyd Honeyghan beating the Lone star cobra in the USA.

Being unfancied, fighting the divisions number one, away from home cannot be compared to winning a vacant or alphabet title in your home town.

I'm favouring a ring belt type system over the alphabets nowadays.

kickbxn5 · Oct 3, 2008

Beeston Brawler said:

I think the WBC is the most credible.

The WBA have the ridiculous regular/super champion thing going and are too quick to strip fighters or make interim matches.

The IBF are too quick to strip fighters and often impose ridiculously bad mandatories which lead to vacation. They don't seem to give a **** about having the best fighters holding their belts.

Don't even get me started on the WBO. Having Amir Khan ranked at #2 says it all, bearing in mind he hadn't fought one of the top 3 135lb'ers in BRITAIN.
Click to expand...

I couldn't have siad it any better!

THE BLADE · Oct 3, 2008

JabCross727 said:

On ESB, it is a widespread consensus that there are too many weight classes and titles due to the ABCs of the sport. While that may be the case, I would ask respondents to put this aside. On this poll and thread, I ask which of the four major sanctioning bodies has the least credibility in your view. When answering this poll, please explain why this is so. Just saying you dont like the acronym or they suck will not suffice. Examples may be, but not limited to sanctioning fees, mandatories, and biased ratings.

So vote and comment fully, rationally, and appropriately.
Click to expand...

They are still all corrupt. The WBO is the least recognized as it only exists since the late 80's. It is a mess, we need one sanctioning body. The candidat for the White House, McCain promises he would do something about it.

Beeston Brawler · Oct 3, 2008

UndisputedUK said:

The vacant WBO shots and number 1 positions in each division are gifted to a lot of UK fighters. Nicky Cook had a good fight against Alex Arthur, won the WBO title, but this is light years away from Lloyd Honeygun beating the Lone star cobra in the USA.

Being unfancied, fighting the divisions number one, away from home cannot be compared to winning a vacant or alphabet title in your home town.

I'm favouring a ring belt type system over the alphabets nowadays.
Click to expand...

Totally agree.

The BBC did a piece on boxing not long after Hatton lost to Mayweather - and in it they were hyping up Britain's world champions and prospects. Gavin Rees was on, as was Enzo Maccarinelli and Alex Arthur, yet no sign of Ricky Hatton or Joe Calzaghe atsch

Log in or Sign up

So which boxing sanctioning body do you see as the least credible as of the moment?

istmeno Well-Known Member Full Member

UndisputedUK Boxing Addict Full Member

kickbxn5 Active Member Full Member

THE BLADE Well-Known Member Full Member

Beeston Brawler Comical Ali-egedly Full Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

So which boxing sanctioning body do you see as the least credible as of the moment?

istmeno Well-Known Member Full Member

UndisputedUK Boxing Addict Full Member

kickbxn5 Active Member Full Member

THE BLADE Well-Known Member Full Member

Beeston Brawler Comical Ali-egedly Full Member