Why is WBC 'better'?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Beeston Brawler, Jan 24, 2008.

Page 3 of 3
  1. kg0208

    kg0208 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    16,031
    Likes Received:
    6
    WBA is older.
     
    kg0208, Jan 24, 2008
    #31
  2. john b

    john b EVERTON 0- OLdham 1 Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    6,351
    Likes Received:
    0
    cheers for that.
     
    john b, Jan 24, 2008
    #32
  3. kg0208

    kg0208 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    16,031
    Likes Received:
    6
    None of them are good anyways....and not sure I trust Ring much anymore.

    ESB rankings rule!
     
    kg0208, Jan 24, 2008
    #33
  4. randeris

    randeris Boxing Addict Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Messages:
    3,339
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is only one champion per division, the Ring champion, period.
     
    randeris, Jan 24, 2008
    #34
  5. kg0208

    kg0208 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    16,031
    Likes Received:
    6
    That belt can be invalidated when someone holds it hostage, much like the Lineal title.

    Unified titles are better IMO than both, but are nearly impossible to do.
     
    kg0208, Jan 24, 2008
    #35
  6. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    25,495
    Likes Received:
    2,179
    LOL, alphabet crap is alphabet crap, think of WBA as cow crap; WBC, cat crap; The Ring, horse crap; lineal title, dog crap.

    They may all be different forms of crap, but still crap.

    There can be only one World Champion for each division, thus THE World Champion, and beauty of that is that you get to decide the formula to create who you think THE World Champion is.
     
    TBooze, Jan 24, 2008
    #36
Page 3 of 3