The RING Title Doesn't Get Enough Respect

[squealpiggy]

If you beat the champion in a championship fight then you become champ. That's how championship fights work. Or at least it should be... The Ring belt is highly regarded because it doesn't strip fighters for not fighting the arbitrary mandatory, and it doesn't make BS political decisions such as allowing defeated champions to keep their titles on a technicality.

How on earth could Floyd be declared the champion automatically? Why should he be given a championship without so much as throwing a punch? Because he's good? If that's your logic he should just move right up to Heavyweight via Middle, Super Middle, Light Heavy and Cruiser and become the champion at the most weights EVAR... You have to fight and beat the champion to become the champion and if you do fight and beat the champion in a championship fight then you become the champion yourself, even if it's the only fight you ever win.

It's not like The Ring gives the title to whoever they please. Once they have a title the Ring, under it's own policy cannot remove it, and if the champion loses it then it changes hands, no ifs and or buts.

[!! $iN]

And I always maintained Floyd was automatically the Champ at 147 when he moved up because he was the best fighter there as well as virtually on the planet. He didn't need to out run Carlos Baldomir to prove that point so he could simply say he's the Ring Champ.

Why is Mayweather wasting his time fighting anyone when Mr. RunW/Knives says he doesn't need to fight anyone at all to prove he's the best...

[psychopath]

The fact is boxers go after paper belts cause they know they'll make more money with them. Some fighters who are stars don't need them and don't bother with them, but all other fighters do.

Huh ???? Do you know you're fact buddy? They'll be making more money with the paper belts? That's bull****! Do you know that all RING Belt holders are current belt holders or former belt holders of the paper belts? Some only threw out their paper belts after they've been awarded the RING BELT.

They chase these paper belts not because they'll be earning more out of it but because that is their first step to get a crack at the RING BELT which means p4p best at a division.

Nobody will be a RING BELT holder or a P4P fighter if the fighter hasn't rule any division, now that's the fact.

[Crazy Dude]

Huh ???? Do you know you're fact buddy? They'll be making more money with the paper belts? That's bull****! Do you know that all RING Belt holders are current belt holders or former belt holders of the paper belts? Some only threw out their paper belts after they've been awarded the RING BELT.

As I mentioned., they threw away their belts because they were star attractions and didn't need belts to get attention. Other fighters do need belts to get the publics attention. That's why they go after the belts and thats why they make more money after they've got them.

They chase these paper belts not because they'll be earning more out of it but because that is their first step to get a crack at the RING BELT which means p4p best at a division.

Getting a paper belt doesn't necessarily get you any closer to a ring belt. btw the phrase p4p best at a division doesn't really make sense since the term p4p is used to make comparisons across different divisions.

Nobody will be a RING BELT holder or a P4P fighter if the fighter hasn't rule any division, now that's the fact.

Mayweather, De La Hoya, Mosely were all ring belt holders and top ten p4p listers at one time or another. And none of them ever ruled a division.

[dumdane]

As I mentioned., they threw away their belts because they were star attractions and didn't need belts to get attention. Other fighters do need belts to get the publics attention. That's why they go after the belts and thats why they make more money after they've got them.



Getting a paper belt doesn't necessarily get you any closer to a ring belt. btw the phrase p4p best at a division doesn't really make sense since the term p4p is used to make comparisons across different divisions.



Mayweather, De La Hoya, Mosely were all ring belt holders and top ten p4p listers at one time or another. And none of them ever ruled a division.

The Ring-belt is generally more meaningfull than any of the alphabet titles, BUT..
There is one MAJOR problem whit the Ring-belt as it stands.
The lack of ability (or willingness?) to force mandatories means that once you are a champ, you can ignore whatever meaningfull challenge is out there and remain champ. That's just not good enough.

Sure at times mandatories are more of a nuicance than a good thing. They frequently get in the way of better fights - especially since alphabet-mandatories are often complete bollocks. But having no mandatories at all, whatever the champ does, is certainly not the way to go.

[!! $iN]

The Ring-belt is generally more meaningfull than any of the alphabet titles, BUT..
There is one MAJOR problem whit the Ring-belt as it stands.
The lack of ability (or willingness?) to force mandatories means that once you are a champ, you can ignore whatever meaningfull challenge is out there and remain champ. That's just not good enough.

Sure at times mandatories are more of a nuicance than a good thing. They frequently get in the way of better fights - especially since alphabet-mandatories are often complete bollocks. But having no mandatories at all, whatever the champ does, is certainly not the way to go.

I think mandatories are absolutely pointless. I mean, how often do we really see a worthy mandatory get a shot? Even if there are mandatories, fighters are sometimes willing to drop belts instead of facing the mandatory. Without mandatories, I think the best will eventually fight the best because usually that's where the most money is...

[dumdane]

I think mandatories are absolutely pointless. I mean, how often do we really see a worthy mandatory get a shot? Even if there are mandatories, fighters are sometimes willing to drop belts instead of facing the mandatory. Without mandatories, I think the best will eventually fight the best because usually that's where the most money is...

Well there should be a huge diff between the Ring no. 2 and the average alphabet mandatory.

I agree the alphabet mandatories are often pointless. But a Ring mandatory fight would in most cases be a fight between the actual two best fighters in the division (If the Ring keeps up it's standart in ranking fighters).
Even if you don't agree it's the two very best in the division, it would certainly be right up there.

Now i wouldn't want to see Constant mandatories ruining the possibilities of other meaningfull voluntary defences. BUT - If for example the same two fighters have been on top of a division (ranked 1 and 2)for perhaps 1½-2 years, and the reigning champ feels no incentive to do anything about it, i'd like to see some kind of sanction.

[Benny Leonard]

Forget the belts. Just fight.

It's cooler to be a Maverick, than a puppet.

There are 4 belts right now that are considered "Legit."

What a joke. Soon there will be 5,6,7,8,9....

[!!! Beowulf !!!]

I guess Ricky Hatton is essentially fighting his Ring Magazine Mandatory challenger next.

[dumdane]

I guess Ricky Hatton is essentially fighting his Ring Magazine Mandatory challenger next.

Yes - essentially so. If they had a mandatory policy.

Not saying champs should be forced to take on mandatories all the time. The thing can certainly be overdone.

But as i said - If the same two has been ranked 1 and 2 in their division for a prolonged period, and the champ seems unvilling to get it on. The Ring, for their own sakes, ought to have some kind of way of applying pressure. Otherwise the Ring title ends up being little better than the alphabet titles.