What happens when The Ring champ denies the number 1 contender?

[warp1432]

Ok so this has been bothering me for a while.

What happens if the The Ring champion refuses to fight the number 1 contender, who usually is the true number 1 contender in the divsion since it's The Ring's ratings which are pretty fair, like how Hagler was denied his shot until the goverment got invovled.

The Ring policy is that the champions can fight whoever/ whenever, but is this fair if the number 1 contender keeps getting denied his shot.

Will they ever have mandatories? I mean I don't think having mandatories is really a bad idea, it's just the alphabet titles have such crappy mandatories most of the time. So what happens here? Do you think The Ring will ever inforce mandatories?

[squealpiggy]

No, the Ring doesn't sanction bouts, it just awards the championships. Threatening to drop a champion quickly becomes political, and has led to the rampant corruption we see in the current championship sanctioning bodies.

[warp1432]

I know that, but just think about it. Is it really fair for the other fighter not to get his shot? Though...the public could eventually demand is so much it would become a high money fight? Thus causing the champ to take it?

Still...

[raysan]

Thats the downfall to the ring title. For instance Ricky Hatton is the Ring champion at 140, but wasnt ready for a fight with Floyd Mayweather at the time so Floyd never got his shot.

[THe TRiNiTY]

The Ring doesn't do anything. Champions can fight whoever they want. The rankings for each division just give the reader an idea of; a: Who is more deserving, b: In what order do the fighters fall, in terms of skill/commitment and win/losses.