Ring updates championship policy to fill vacancies

Here is my article for those interested: A Loss of Faith in the “Bible” By Matthew Paras When then-Editor-in-Chief of The Ring Nigel Collins reestablished the magazine’s championship policy in 2002, he was looking to give back credibility to the sport by crowning a true champion in each weight division. Boxing had been plagued by meaningless title belts and it was Collin’s initiative to help provide clarity to the sport. A decade later, The Ring belt is now another meaningless title. On Thursday, May 3, 2012, The Ring announced major reforms to its championship policy in order to make it easier to fill 11 vacancies in the 17 weight classes (read full statement here: http://******.craveonline.com/blog/172677-the-ring-updates-championship-policy). With the changes, vacancies are now filled by pitting the #1 ranked fighter against #2 or either facing anyone from #3 to a mindboggling #5. Current Editor-in-Chief Michael Rosenthal explained the reasoning for the changes on The Ring’s website. “We didn’t want to sit back and continue to say, in effect, ‘Oh, well. We can’t force these guys to fight each other so there’s nothing we can do,” he said. “We believe we’ve come up with a new policy that will pump more life into the sport and hopefully motivate the best to fight the best, which is what fans deserve.” While Rosenthal may be right about the fans deserving the best fighting each other, fans also deserve integrity. Since the magazine’s inception in 1922, The Ring has always strived for integrity but with the reformed changes, its integrity can now be seriously questioned. Under the new system’s rules, Timothy Bradley could fight Zab Judah and possibly take home The Ring’s Junior Welterweight Championship. Would anyone consider Bradley the legitimate champion without beating the winner of Lamont Peterson and Amir Khan’s rematch (should it come to fruition in light of Peterson’s recent positive test for synthetic testosterone)? Regarding the number two fighter challenging anyone from numbers three through five, in the case of the 140-pound weight class, the rematch between Amir Khan and Lamont Peterson will most likely be declared the champion due to Bradley’s upcoming fight with Pacquiao in a higher division. The new policies create a subjectivity that wasn’t established in Collins’ reign as editor. Let’s create a hypothetical scenario. If the number one fighter were to fight the number four fighter and the number two fighter were to fight the number three fighter around the same time frame, which victor would be crowned? The Ring Ratings Panel would most likely have to make that final call, essentially contradicting the original purpose of The Ring’s championship policy. On the other hand, the purpose of The Ring’s policy often went unnoticed. ESPN recognized the magazine’s ratings and champions but promoters and premium networks ignored whenever The Ring belt was on the line- that is unless a Golden Boy-promoted champion was fighting on HBO’s airwaves. To this day, sanctioning bodies are still more valuable. Ask Paulie Malignaggi, who is now being mentioned as a possible opponent for Devon Alexander in August due to his WBA welterweight title victory over Vyacheslav Senchenko. Promoters can still sell an alphabet title to the general public without having to worry about whether or not the fighter holding it was a true champion. Still, The Ring’s former championship model provided integrity to the sport that was lacking in the midst of Morrade Hakkar-inspired mandatories. Was The Ring belt impacting the sport? Debatable. Was it noble? Absolutely. With The Ring’s changes, the nobility and credibility are gone. Now it’s just another title belt. In essence, The Ring got impatient. Even before its decision to reform its policies, The Ring made its fair share of questionable decisions over the last six months. After firing Nigel Collins in September, The Ring made controversial decisions regarding two different championships. The first head-scratching move was not awarding Chad Dawson the light heavyweight belt when his fight against Bernard Hopkins was initially ruled a TKO victory. This was a sharp contrast to Collin’s reign when the Joel Casamayor-Jose Santa Cruz robbery was upheld even when there was pressure for The Ring to recognize Cruz as the legitimate lightweight champion in November 2007. While Hopkins-Dawson I was eventually overturned, The Ring continued its questionable decision making when it declared a fight between Steve Cunningham and Yoan Pablo Hernandez would fill the vacancy at cruiserweight. Since Marco Huck’s decision to fight Alexander Povetkin at heavyweight, The Ring decided to remove Huck from the ratings. “Thus, we were faced with a decision to make. Do we keep Huck at No. 1 because he might return to the cruiserweight division depending on what happens on Feb. 25? Or do we follow his lead and allow Hernandez and Cunningham to fight for the vacant RING championship?” wrote Rosenthal on The Ring’s website. “THE RING Editorial Board decided that the latter made more sense. Huck will be removed from the cruiserweight ratings, and Hernandez and Cunningham will be elevated to Nos. 1 and 2, which positions them to fight for the magazine’s title.” Again, The Ring went against previous precedent. When Joe Calzaghe moved to light heavyweight, he was allowed to keep his super middleweight title if he wanted to drop down again and fight at that weight class. The decision was left up to Calzaghe, not The Ring. For a magazine that has prided itself as “The Bible of Boxing,” The Ring’s latest decisions have caused people to question their faith. When bought by Golden Boy Promotions in 2007, many were worried that The Ring’s ratings would be influenced and the magazine would have total control. After years of seemingly doing nothing to prove those people wrong, management gutted the magazine, coming up with a whole new writing staff. From reading the articles and even the ratings themselves, to be fair, a pro-Golden Boy bias does not seem apparent. What does seem to be there is a magazine that has disregarded the previous traditions that made it so historical. If The Ring wants more fighters to own their belt, that’s their decision. Let’s just not pretend the titlists who fill their vacancies are actual champions. http://www.maxboxing.com/news/max-boxing-news/a-loss-of-faith-in-the-bible

Really disappointed with this decision. The Ring rankings system wasn't perfect but it was as good as you see nowadays, and I respected the Ring champ. It meant something to be the ring champ but not now perhaps.........

It's a pretty long read. Not sure what to make of it though. You know how I feel about Golden Boy. Not sure if everything that's going on with the ring is their doing. It seems like it to me though. Interesting read. I'd green you, but I just greened you a few hours ago for calling spoonwars a retard :rofl: It bothers me that The Ring went that direction but doesn't surprise me. Promotional companies are so media reliant in their business that they're really media outlets in and of themselves. It is like network conglomerates own multiple media outlets. Is some integrity lost? Sure, but it isn't like they've completely thrown it out the window. The Ring to TV Guide comparison is spot on really in another way thay goes unmentioned. TV Guide is dying as are newspapers and magazines. The Ring has a storied past, but it is going by the wayside. The material is really quite dated to someone who reads sites like this one. The Ring is probably maintaining more tradition being bought and run by a large promotional company rather than an investment firm with their hands in many different markets.

If anyone wants to take the time to read this. It's actually a great read, very good article bu an underrated writer IMO. Indeed. I sent in an article to Max that will be posted hopefully next week. Tim Starks probably said it better than I did though :lol1:

Wait, but i was told by Dazed, iron dan, big dunn, and dominicano last night that ring/lineal titles dont improve your resume. Could that be true mr rold? Being the legit World champion of a class boosts a resume but it's not the only booster and no sub for high quality of overall competition. Lots of non-champs rate over guys who were the champ historically. As to Ring, their new policy is distinctly at odds the purpose of recognizing a legit world champ. They may back into it sometimes, but they seek now to fill vacancies over crown champs.

Wait, but i was told by Dazed, iron dan, big dunn, and dominicano last night that ring/lineal titles dont improve your resume. Could that be true mr rold?

Its good for the 3rd, 4th and 5th ranked fighters who might not get a shot because they don't bring much to the table in terms of ppv sales and get sidelined by the number 1 and number 2 fighters who would rather fight a shot fighter who sells good numbers.

So what if the #1 guy fights at the #4 guy and the #2 guy fights the #3 guy at the same day. Which fight would be for the vacant belt? Which ever is 1st. Once one fight has happened that guy is the champ so the other fight doesn't matter. Does this mean Khan Peterson is now for ring belt?

As long as there are multi champions that won't fight each other, the titles are better vacant than just giving them to fill the vacancies. The Ring is not the WBC.

So under these new rules. The Peterson-Khan rematch could very well be for The Ring JWW title? with Bradley fighting Pac at 147 next thats not too bad a scenario as he's stepping out of the division (even though he probably will come back) However if Peterson was fighting Judah instead of Khan, that too would be for the ring belt according to the new rules, which is a bit ****. It was fine the way it was, there was no need to change the rules. If the top dogs dont fight each other, dont reward them

the ring should be the only belt in existence all the others should be scrapped

I didn't read all of it ....but did it just say that if the # 2 fought the # 5 it would be for the Ring belt? that's dildos

What was the old policy btw? I dont think anything really changed #1 vs. #2 (or 1 vs. 3 under special circumstances) Beltholder retains until he loses, moves up in weight, or retires

stupid as hell better to have no Ring champ than let # 4 or #5 fight for it point is supposed to be the best fighting the best for it why'd they change it from unifying IBF/WBA/WBC crowning a Ring champ? right before Darchinyan did so they killed off that ruling the usual 1 vs 2 or 1 vs 3 rule was fine they're losing credibility now

So this means if Pac beats the winner of Berto/Ortiz or Kell Brook he is Ring Champ? Might actually get Mayweather to agree to fight him, it would hurt him deep if Pac was the Ring champ. Bad thing is if Mayweather decides to face Kell Brook or the Berto/Ortiz winner he will become champ without fighting Pac who he is ducking and his demands would get even more ridiculous. Good thing Canelo looks like he is next and Floyd will be dropped from the welter ratings

I thoroughly disagree with this direction. Under this premise, Salgado COULD face Martinez for the title at 130. They may (note they use the word may over will on 2-5 matches) not allow something like that, but it's possible in theory. That's unfathomable. I removed myself from the Ring's Ratings Advisory Panel following the release of these new rules. It's nothing personal. I think Mike and Doug are good dudes and a lot of what they've done with Ring has been good. The magazine, after some hiccups, has been looking sharp and more modern. They've diversified the pool of writers, giving Gresiman a column that rocks BTW. :) I just can't get with this outlook on ratings and champions. It's not like Nigel and co. was some pursit panacea. They BLATANTLY ignored the publications own history and ignored clear lineages when they restarted (based on Ring's own lines, Flyweight and Feather were unbroken when they re-established). It was also pedantically obsessed with rules and didn't allow for wiggle. In the 1980s, Ring recognized Hearns at 54 before Duran by process of elimination. The same should have been done when Vic won all three belts at 15 and Montiel left the class, but he didn't get what he earned in the Ring because he beat guys in the wrong order? Silly. Ring also largely refused to give Pacquiao credit for being the first fighter ever to win lineal titles in four classes. That was an editorial choice to ignore THEIR OWN lineage, instead pointing out his three Ring belts in self congratulatory fashion. That's intellectual dishonesty. Period. Still, they leaned in what I think was the right direction on what a genuine World Champion is. I don't think the new policy does it. *High five* for having principles. Yeah, the more I think about, I'm not sure even fighting the #3 contender should be allowed for the ring belt.

I thoroughly disagree with this direction. Under this premise, Salgado COULD face Martinez for the title at 130. They may (note they use the word may over will on 2-5 matches) not allow something like that, but it's possible in theory. That's unfathomable. I removed myself from the Ring's Ratings Advisory Panel following the release of these new rules. It's nothing personal. I think Mike and Doug are good dudes and a lot of what they've done with Ring has been good. The magazine, after some hiccups, has been looking sharp and more modern. They've diversified the pool of writers, giving Gresiman a column that rocks BTW. :) I just can't get with this outlook on ratings and champions. It's not like Nigel and co. was some pursit panacea. They BLATANTLY ignored the publications own history and ignored clear lineages when they restarted (based on Ring's own lines, Flyweight and Feather were unbroken when they re-established). It was also pedantically obsessed with rules and didn't allow for wiggle. In the 1980s, Ring recognized Hearns at 54 before Duran by process of elimination. The same should have been done when Vic won all three belts at 15 and Montiel left the class, but he didn't get what he earned in the Ring because he beat guys in the wrong order? Silly. Ring also largely refused to give Pacquiao credit for being the first fighter ever to win lineal titles in four classes. That was an editorial choice to ignore THEIR OWN lineage, instead pointing out his three Ring belts in self congratulatory fashion. That's intellectual dishonesty. Period. Still, they leaned in what I think was the right direction on what a genuine World Champion is. I don't think the new policy does it.

I don't think it's a very consistent or clear in meeting it's objective. The idea is the Ring belt is hard to get, special, therefore sought after. If you make it substantially easier to obtain the belt then people have it and it opens up yet more dispute of whether it's really merited. As has been said, if the #2 guy beats the #5 guy whom is also stylistically perfect for him, it's BS he could be ring champ. The #1 guy could be actively trying to face said #2 guy, and even a #3 or so. So it's going to fall on it's head and become illogical, very debatable quite often, losing it's value. Shame.

this is bull****

What was the old policy btw? I dont think anything really changed