Tired of The Ring Belt

Agreed.

Good post. The Ring gives a good barometer as to the state of the boxing landscape, not just their own little sphere of influence.

Plus, I give them credit for setting their standards and sticking to them. It would be easy to give these titles out. But they seem to want to make guys earn it in the ring, not make the guy a champ for the sake of having one.

If the guys don't meet their standards in the ring, its not their fault. Let the chips fall where they may. It's a magazine, not a sanctioning body with all that comes with being that.

 

We boxing fans are a fickle bunch and the only credible PFP lists are the ones that match our opinions.

 

It's an award from a magazine. Nothing more. Their rankings are often times the best however.

 

Ring doesn't care what you think. Ring is concerned with having sound rankings, and champions that are deserving of the title. They are NOT concerned with filling a champion Vacancy.....simply for the sake of filling it.

Sometimes things do work out in a way that you have a deserving number 1 contender that qualifies to be recognized as champ and isn't. But so what.....the world of boxing doesn't crumble.

The point of the Ring rankings and belts is to give an outsider an understanding of who the best fighters in a division are. And in some cases which fighters have distinguished themselves enough to be called champ.

They are not meant to be taken as the gospel. They are a guide but the champs are almost always deserving of the title. And their top tens are solid. That doesn't mean Big Reg will agree with every rank of every fighter, but it does mean reasonable people won't find them to be incompetent.

 

There isn't anything wrong with it, for what it is.

But what gets me, is the comments (a few on this thread too) that say it's better than the ABC's, and don't worry about the ABC's, just hvae the Ring belt.

My point is, without the ABC's, there is no ring belt. It has all the advantages, but none of the disadvantages. It's really no different than an ESB voted ratings for each weight. (tho, there are probably less morons involved... )

I agree with you on this one for sure.

That's my point I guess. People don't compare apples with apples.

The Ring is trying to get together a list of the best overall fighters in the welterweight division. Nothing else
The ABC's are ranking fighters, in order, in relation to their championship belt. End of story.

Very different things really.

Yeah, I'm with you on that one. But it's a horses for courses thing.

By ABC's not ranking other belt holders (there's not point doing it), basically 3 other guys are straight out of the mix anyway.

 

I hate their P4P rankings (and other rankings) which focus too much on past achievement than a boxers current state of ability. Cotto and Hopkins aren't p4p top 10 anymore, Cotto especially. Some might say you need to see another fight to tell that... I don't.

 

i like the ring better than the other belts, because the other belts' allow fighters to call themselves "Champion" while avoiding the best fighters in their respective division.

 

it does not prevent it from happening; however, the other belts specifically encourage fighters to avoid the best in their divisions.

Examples...

In the wbc Andre Berto is the Welterweight Champion of the world, while Manny Pac and Shane Mosely are not even top 10 ranked fighters.

In the WBA Shane Mosely is the Champ, while Manny Pac is not a top 10 ranked fighter.


Absurd...

 

Without the Ring belt we don't know who the champions are in each division. Dawson should have fought Tarver before Hopkins did. It becomes irrelevant after he's already been dethroned.

 

That's because the sanctioning bodies do not rank the champions of the other sanctioning bodies. That's why it's ridiculous.

 

at this point, i don't even give a **** who the champ is. it doesn't really mean anything anymore, since the best don't seem to have to prove it nowadays.

i just want to see good fights

 

exactly