The ring belt

No one's answered this yet? Well, I'll give it a whirl.
****, I believe it's something like "If you beat the number-1 dude, you're the Ring champ" or "If you beat the Ring champ, you're the new Ring champ." It's just a magazine title, but a popular magazine title. Take it for what it's worth. It's pretty respected.

 

The Ring belt is very flawed.

The Ring top 10 lists are usually pretty good though.

 

This is how its awarded:

IF there is no current RING champion in the division, who is pretty much regarded as the true division champ by almost everybody then a fight between the #1 and #2 ranked fighters determine the division champ.

In some cases its determined between #1 and #3 ranked fighters due to the #1 already beating the crap of #2 before the rank was placed or a bunch of other reasons. This is usually rare.

IF there is a RING champ already then whoever beats him becomes the new man of the division.

Its fairly simple.

 

While the Ring is the subject matter here I was wondering: I ordered my subsciption to the Mag in early June, $50.00. Now it's September and all I have gotten was recently a little black and white deal called the Ring's boxing almanac. The web page said allow six to eight weeks for delivery and I'm pretty sure I'm way past that. Did any of you guys experience the same?? Have to wait a long time before you got your first issue?? Appreciate any comments.

 

Kind of like Hopkins defending against Wright.

The Ring belt is garbage.

 

It would be nice to be able to believe in SOMETHING.

 

The Ring belt is the closest thing to the Lineal Title.

When the Championship is vacant in a division, the #1 contender must face the #2 contender to win the Ring belt. In some cases, it can be decided with a showdown between the #1 and the #3. The Ring belt is very popular in the 1920s and ignores the ABC organization's bull****.

 

If Hopkins had the WBA and WBC belts, he would have still faced Wright.

Also, using your logic, Hagler should be criticized for facing a former Lightweight like Duran.

 

Please anybody have any comments for my questions in post #5?? I'm starting to feel really stupid running for my mailbox every day......It's like waiting for some chick to call that you know somewhere deep down she's not going to.

 

Yes, most of the times mandatories are garbage.

And when Champs fight other good fighters, usually those fighters are very high ranked in the Ring ratings. :yep

 

You said it "the runner up"

Winky isnt even close to being a Lightheavy and never will be.They fought at 170 which is WAY closer to S.Middle than L.Heavy.

Hopkins has not proved that he is the best Light Heavy.He beat a very overrated Tarver who would win/lose win/lose win/lose against the same guys all the while not giving any young bulls a chance to get a shot.

If there were a top 10 tournement at L.Heavy right now for the Ring belt Hopkins would not come out on top.

 

This is boxing and that happens. Champs are not always the best fighters in their respective division. You can see the case of Floyd Patterson for one example. A recent example would be Carlos Baldomir.

 

And that is simply why im pointing out that the Ring belt has flaws.

In some cases you can't look at the man holiding the ring belt and consider him the best in his division.

This just shows how ****ed up Boxing really is.

 

I agree but it also happens in other sports. Germany was Champ of the 1974 football world cup but most thought Holland was better. Nadal could beat Federer a few times and still not accumulate enough points to get above Federer in the tennis Top10 rankings. But yeah I agree that boxing is ****ed up.