forget the 147 ring belt........

Forcing a mandatory doesn't mean shit when the mandatory isn't the actual #1 contender. You could easily sit on an alphabet title belt like you could the ring. They're both flawed. You look at situations like Roy Jones-Rick Frazier or Bernard Hopkins-Morade Hakkar and it's just disgraceful. A champ really should have to fight the top contender, but the organizations are corrupt. In some situations though, what if a champ cannot fight the #1 contender? Let's say the champ is an exclusive HBO fighter and the #1 contender is exclusive on Showtime? Or if one of the promoters demands options on the other guy in the future? The Muhammad Ali reform act is supposed to help with promoters not being able to demand options, but they still do.

Forcing a mandatory doesn't mean shit when the mandatory isn't the actual #1 contender. You could easily sit on an alphabet title belt like you could the ring.

This is exactly why the Ring Magazine Championship is total shit, they allow you to sit on a title and hold the divison up much the way Lewis did after he fought Klitschko much the way Klitschko has done to avoid Rahman before he retired, and now the way Floyd has done for a long time now. The WBC WBA and IBF along with the WBO might not be as appealing to some but the idea of forcing a mandotory is something that must be done in order to keep this sport real, we cant have champions just cherry picking I just dont understand why Ring hasnt changed that idea.

u consider him the best WW in the world even though he hasn't beaten a top welter.....ok......i know it won't happen but rankings in boxing are getting worse with this crap.....oh well.....to me the winner that comes out july 26 is the best welterweight in the world until of course floyd proves me wrong which of course i would love for him to do so....... What is with people with their "it's getting so bad nowadays" nonsense? It's not any worse than numerous instances in past history. Jack Dempsey held the HW title, the Ring recognized him, even though he hadn't defended his title in 3 years. James Braddock held the title for a full two years without even fighting, before losing to Joe Louis. You didn't see The Ring stripping Larry Holmes in the mid 80s for not defeating their #1 or #2 contenders.

^^that pretty much sums it up.........

The Ring wouldn't strip him and they wouldn't need to. Cotto vs Tony determines once and for all the #1 contender to Floyd and if he won't fight the winner no one but his huggers will still acknowledge him as bein the real champ anymore. The distinction would get passed to whoever wins that fight.

Even though Golden Boy owns the Ring mag, i believe the Ring mag editors still follows their rule about the Ring belt. If GBP manipulates it, then the Ring belt and mag will be a joke. I would still buy the mag for the articles though.

u consider him the best WW in the world even though he hasn't beaten a top welter.....ok......i know it won't happen but rankings in boxing are getting worse with this crap.....oh well.....to me the winner that comes out july 26 is the best welterweight in the world until of course floyd proves me wrong which of course i would love for him to do so.......

Petty thread, you say forget about the belt and then say they should give it to someone else. Contradicting yourself maybe? That being said Floyd is still the best WW in the world before or after july 26th, let him show you in the ring though.

it weighs just as much as the others to me now that a active fighter owns the shit.

This....... is stupid. Thread closed.

ok but cotto already beat both of those fighters u mentioned.....and floyd has not beaten ANY top welter in the mix.......u beat judah by decision and get the ring belt.....fawk that........ Jesus Christ. I expect boxing fans to have short memories, but this was less than two years ago. Judah was the Ring champ, he lost to Baldomir, then Baldo lost to Mayweather. The Ring made its rules and policy clear back when it was re-done in 2001/2002, but their rules on stripping have been consistent. They're not gonna strip a fighter because a contender is doing better work at the division. Did you see The Ring stripping Michael Spinks before he lost to Mike Tyson, who had done WAY better work than Spinks in the previous 2 years? Did they strip Joel Casamayor, for Juan Diaz? Did they strip Floyd Patterson when Sonny Liston was doing better work before he beat Patterson in the ring?

ok but cotto already beat both of those fighters u mentioned.....and floyd has not beaten ANY top welter in the mix.......u beat judah by decision and get the ring belt.....fawk that........

Yeah I'm sure Golden Boy would give the title to a TOP RANK fighter. Yeah that makes so much sense. Where do you people come up with this shit? :ugh: :rofl: Yeah I'm sure Golden Boy would strip Mayweather of the 147 title because he's fighting the Golden Boy and helping with the financial windfall they will receive.

He will be stripped of the WBC belt though.

Except the whole ring policy (even before Oscar) is you can't get stripped of the belt. Even then it wouldn't be for a vacant title because Mosley and Quintana are aheead of Margarito in the ratings and a win over Cintron won't change that. Why don't people get this?

Yeah I'm sure Golden Boy would give the title to a TOP RANK fighter. Yeah that makes so much sense. Where do you people come up with this shit? :ugh: