whats with the belts ?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by jazzbone, Aug 7, 2008.


Page 2 of 2
  1. owell

    owell Active Member Full Member

    1,464
    0
    Jul 20, 2008
    Belts are only good nowadays as a stepping stone into garnering a bigger payday but does not necessarily mean you are the best in your division.
     
    owell, Aug 7, 2008
    owell, Aug 7, 2008
    #16
  2. DanePugilist

    DanePugilist God vs God - Death Angel Full Member

    6,837
    2
    Oct 14, 2006
    Belts are good for keeping the pants up - and to cover the navel. It won't be long till we shall see our first ABC suspenders - which will result in at least 8 World champs. Then there is a belt full of rings.
     
    DanePugilist, Aug 7, 2008
    DanePugilist, Aug 7, 2008
    #17
  3. Hermit

    Hermit Loyal Member banned

    44,341
    3
    Jan 29, 2008
    Hell just froze over. We agree on something.:lol:
     
    Hermit, Aug 7, 2008
    Hermit, Aug 7, 2008
    #18
  4. BigReg

    BigReg Broad Street Bully Full Member

    38,117
    5
    Jun 26, 2007
    I see many people are disrespecting the belts, and saying they are worthless. If that's the case, how come people on this site place such a high importance on unification?
     
    BigReg, Aug 7, 2008
    BigReg, Aug 7, 2008
    #19
  5. Hermit

    Hermit Loyal Member banned

    44,341
    3
    Jan 29, 2008
    Some, not all. Look at Pavlik's current situation. Lots of people want him to stay at MW and just be the fox in the hen house. Others want him to move up saying there are better fights to be made. Personally, I can't keep up with ONE division and ONE ABC's list of top 10. Now multiply that by 4. Can we say Gary Lockett?

    He was taking **** which ever direction he went on this one. But in all honesty, I do recognize the belts have commercial value. Someone said Hatton just refused to pay the sanction fees any more. GOOD FOR HIM!
     
    Hermit, Aug 7, 2008
    Hermit, Aug 7, 2008
    #20
Page 2 of 2