..About These Bullshit 'Vacancy' Claims...

There have been stupid threads about how Miguel Cotto or Floyd Mayweather have won this vacant title or that vacant title, as if the ABC boys really matter in the first place. First of all, if you think those titles matter you should stop reading now. Because, as simple as this thread will be, it's too complex for you. Now, The Ring Magazine championships are the ones that matter. There are 17 divisions, meaning 17 TRUE titles. All there is to it. And 10 of those titles are vacant. Let's stop it there for a second. Realistically, in the beginning, all titles were vacant, or given to the guy who was widely considered the best in whatever division he was in. When the title was vacant, the two best guys/highest ranked fighters fought for the title and that would settle the issue. The winner was the TRUE champion, regardless of fighting for a vacant tile or not. Not lets use a hypothetical situation. Let's say a title, since the beginning of time has been passed down over the years. Finally, one champion decides to retire. The title would then be VACANT, once again. Does this mean there can never be a champion in the division again? 'Sorry kid, you better throw up or eat a sandwich. Leave the division, no title to see here.' No, then the two best remaining fighters fight AGAIN, and so on and so forth. Keep in mind, Cotto didn't fight the number two guy in the division, or number one for that matter. But he also didn't fight for THE world title. He fought for a a peice of fake gold on some cow skin. All there is to it. Mayweather is NOT a 6 division champion. Hell, Miguel Cotto has not been the TRUE world champion of ANY division. Back in the day, this wouldn't matter. They'd still get credit. Nowadays, you need a trinket, like it's a sign that you've made it. Pshhh, plenty of bums have held trinkets. The sooner you realize those things are only props to make fights seem more meaningful, and to give you leverage for your contract discussion, the better. If Mosley and Cotto fought tomorrow, they'd be fighting for a vacant title at welterweight. Nothing wrong with that, Mayweather left no one a choice. Which is fine. Vacancies are apart of the sports history. Simple as that.

Comments (15)

Look people, even if The Ring forced fights to happen (which would be bad) peoplen would then complain about the order of the rankings. It would/will never be perfect. The way it is structured now is as PERFECT as it will get. For the record, it would be bad because sometimes, the fight you most wanna see in the division is not between the champion and the number one guy. And sometimes, the number one guy has other plans.

17y ago

Zocalo

The thing is that you get some people with legit titles like Casamayor who had his belt since forever it seems and never fought and when he did and even got some gifts(Santa Cruz) until he fought Marquez. I love the Ring belt... it more or less says to everyone that you are the MAN in the division but it is not without its flaws.

17y ago

raabd

And if Diaz wasnt with GBP, "next week" wouldnt be happening. And why should someone who deserves to be #1 have to sit around and wait for the champ to "get around" to fighting him? Look at middleweight for example. Does Arthur Abraham's #1 ranking get him any closer to a shot at the "champ" Pavlik? Nope. Or look at Jr. Welter. Bradley is at #1. He'll probably be on social security before he gets a shot at Hatton. Mandatories are not always a bad thing....... So what if JMM is fighting diaz. These are the two best lightweights in the world. There is no gbp bias as the rankings have not been corrupted since dlh bought the magazine. Abraham will fight pavlik in the near future (I predict this year as bob arum said pavlik will fight 3 times this year with abraham coming in december). Bradley probably won't fight hatton cause hatton will retire in the next two fights thus vacating the belt and making bradley next in line against the number 2. Sure mandatories aren't bad, for a tune up fight. Would u really consider cotto the welterweight champion after beating jennings? The market always dictates the good fights and the best for the most part always end up fighting the best, except for floyd mayweather but you can't blame him for fighting oscar at 154 or hatton at 147.

17y ago

gridiron

The Ring, inventor of ratings late 1920’s. True, The Ring itself cannot require mandatory defenses – unless you don’t count the combined powers of journalism to bring out a fight (that’s how it has worked for centuries.) It is also true, that the champions who became respected or greats never ducked a challenger. Public demand fights mean a lot more than ABC mandatories – the last-mentioned most often based less on results and more on who is willing to pay the criminal sanction fees.

17y ago

OnePunch1099

The Ring champ usually always or eventually fights all the other ranked contenders so it works itself out. The ring does not dictate nor manipulate a fighters career. I almost always see the best fighters fighting for the ring belt. Seldomly do I ever see a ring fighter fighting irrelevants and if they do next time around they fight the other ranked contenders. Next week is a perfect example. And if Diaz wasnt with GBP, "next week" wouldnt be happening. And why should someone who deserves to be #1 have to sit around and wait for the champ to "get around" to fighting him? Look at middleweight for example. Does Arthur Abraham's #1 ranking get him any closer to a shot at the "champ" Pavlik? Nope. Or look at Jr. Welter. Bradley is at #1. He'll probably be on social security before he gets a shot at Hatton. Mandatories are not always a bad thing.......

17y ago

raabd

Th problem with Ring is that is does not require mandatory defenses. How can something be considered a legitimate championship when the "champ" can fight whomever he chooses? Ring rankings are NOT a path to the title. You could be ranked #1 for 10 years and never get a shot at the "champ". Since GBP signed Casamayor, every Ring title fight at 135 has been between 2 GBP fighters. The Ring champ usually always or eventually fights all the other ranked contenders so it works itself out. The ring does not dictate nor manipulate a fighters career. I almost always see the best fighters fighting for the ring belt. Seldomly do I ever see a ring fighter fighting irrelevants and if they do next time around they fight the other ranked contenders. Next week is a perfect example.

17y ago

OnePunch1099

17y ago

THe_TRiNiTY

I'm sorry! I stopped reading when you discarded the ABC belts, COOL! But, then in the same breathe you anoint a fuking magazine! And to beat that, its owned by a promotional entity. Not bribed, but :owned: ! The only thing that truly matters is US! The same magazine that has more Top Rank fighters in their rankings than Golden Boy fighters. Yeah, showing favoritism, one rival promotional fighter at a time.

17y ago

MANGLER

Nobody gives a shit about Cotto winnin vacant belts except PBF's cocksuckers.

17y ago

TheSurgeonMDMPH

17y ago

The_Gambler1981

As a fight fan, lemme ask you this.... Which fight would you rather see. Would you have rather watched Cotto go in there against Jennings for the WBO title or have him taken on Luis Collazo in a regular 12 rounder? Well, like I said it depends on the opponent. I rate Collazo far above Jennings, so I think that would have been a much more interesting fight. Picking up a vacent belt is not that different from seeking out the weakest title holder (unless a division is abnormally strong). I still prefer taking a belt from a champion though.

17y ago

THe_TRiNiTY

Cheers, Calderon :beerchug: Thanks, appreciate the gesture.

17y ago

THe_TRiNiTY

I do not know. I prefer when fighters take the belt from a champion in the ring, people say these belts are meaningless but when you walk to the ring with a belt you do not want to walk out without it, it could make them fight harder (or atleast make them mentally stronger, which is pretty crucial) but this can be countered by if you need that to motivate you your days were numbered anyways. Winning vacent belts is not that bad though, although it depends on the opponent somewhat (sometimes they are good, sometimes they are jokers). If you have a shot to win a belt that could really advance your career, that should be motivation enough. Also really it depends what you do after you win the belt that determines your worth as a champion. If I had to pick between 2 otherwise equal fights (there can be great fights for a vacent strap, aswell as great fights for a held belt), I think that taking the belt from the champion is better. I would not make it out to be that huge a deal, in most cases anyways. As a fight fan, lemme ask you this.... Which fight would you rather see. Would you have rather watched Cotto go in there against Jennings for the WBO title or have him taken on Luis Collazo in a regular 12 rounder?

17y ago

gridiron

Cheers, Calderon :beerchug:

17y ago

The_Gambler1981

17y ago