Which is the best alphabet???

Problem with the WBA is they have so many friggin' titles. Senchenko and Moses are paper champions who have a "regular" belt and Shumenov should never have been awarded that title. Also Sidorenko isn't champion anymore, Moreno is.

 

its the ring **** the abc boys

 

they all suck... all they care is for their money and are bias.. boxing is crooked from the top on down we need to do away with this organizations and take the power away from the promoters... but that would be asking too much it would never happen
:hat:hat

 

He owns it...

Thats the purpose of an editorial...

represents OWNER thinking.

 

No, that is not the point of an editorial.

 

WBA by a kilometre.

 

One could say the IBF is the less corrupted of the alphabet organisations because it's base in the USA and they have to respect some laws the others don't have to follow.

 

WBA is clearly the worst, by far. It may have even three champions for each weight class: interim, world and super. Disgraceful!

In recent years also the WBC looks bad

 

Yes it is...SOrry.

ed·i·to·ri·al (

This content is protected

d

This content is protected

This content is protected

-tôr

This content is protected

This content is protected

-

This content is protected

l, -t

This content is protected

r

This content is protected

-)n.1. An article in a publication expressing the opinion of its editors or publishers.
2. A commentary on television or radio expressing the opinion of the station or network.

 

So you do know that publisher or editor is NOT the same as owner right?

 

yes i do know...

 

Then you understand that your definition is correct thus your previous comment about owners is not?

Unless you have actual proof of ODLH editorial control, that is like saying Summer Redstone runs 60 Minutes.

 

ALright.

I don't have proof.

But if you don't think MOST owner of any media have control over editorial content then i don't know what to say...

But no, i don't have proof.

 

The Wbc has the most credibility...came in existence in the late 60's early 70's and most their title claimants were the recognized world champion....WBA and IBF came along a decade later and had very good title claimants....the WBO the youngest and least credible means little to nothing to me considering the way they strip their champions, their horrible rankings, etc. IMO when considering how many titles a fighter has won( Pacquiao, De La Hoya, Cotto, etc.) I dont count the WBO belt. They are no better than the IBO or NABO