Should boxers boycott the IBF?

Mr panda I gave 3 examples that a 2 second Google search would have proved. I'll repeat. WBA created loads of titles at each weight to maximise fees taken. WBC give shots to the fighter that offers the most money. Mayweather can not fight for 14 months and always fights for a WBC title. Wilder's opponents have been really poor. IBF and WBO have the same issue. They deliberately select terrible mandatory challengers on fighters they "want" to hold their title. Look at Brook for instance, being forced to fight both fighters out of the same eliminator. Dodgy as. WBA are by far the worst.

IBF is doing a great job and all of you should be paying more attention before criticising them. People look at Brook and who he's been fighting, as well as Golovkin and Wade, but what you must realise is: A) You ALWAYS can get an exception to fight in unification before mandatory. Golovkin could've fought BJ or Canelo - had they accepted the fight. Brook could've fought in unification, if him and Hearn were willing to take a risk. Nothing to do with IBF. B) You have a 9 montsh window where you can fight anyone you want, each year. Golovkin could've had another fight sooner after Lemieux, but he was waiting for Canelo and that's why he lost 6 months and has to fight Wade now. Same with Brook, who got injured after Gavin. When you're active, mandatory once a year is not a big deal. C) People probably don't remember that Porter, Khan, Bradley, Alexander, Chaves - all were offered a spot in final eliminator before Bizier and that Ghanian kid and all turned it down. IBF is doing right thing by going down their ratings in those instances and giving a shot to those who actually want it. Not their fault those guys would rather chose safer route. If you think their ratings are that horrible, compare it to WBO and WBA - it's night and day. WBC probably has the best ratings, being fair with them - especially since Mauricio took over, but IBF is very legit as well. IBF, with how clear their rules are, enables boxers to get a clear, straight route to a title, which is what this sport is lacking. You have to get through other ranked fighters to one of two highest positions(you can get eliminator to #2 spot as well, just make a fight with other high ranked fighter), then you know eliminator will be ordered. If your opponent doesn't accept it, you move down the list to another one and you will get a chance to get your shot one way or the other. It's great, if all organisations were so clear with their rules boxing would be so much better. You wouldn't see Quigg or Jacobs being able to avoid real champions yet holding their belts. Educate yourself, sir!

This is better than some thunderdome threads have been :popcorn:

Most/all of them are corrupt and rankings can be manipulated by certain promoters. It's no coincidence that nearly all Hearn's champions are IBF champs. Joshua, Brook, DeGale, Selby and probably more. Stephen Smith is another of his guys who just lost an IBF title fight on Saturday, but he got his shot through Eddie IBF Hearn. The same way people used to joke and call the WBO The "Warren Boxing Organisation" because he always got his fighters shots at WBO and they could defend it against poor fighters for years. He still does in fact, Terry Flanagan, Saunders, Liam Smith. All Warren fighters and currently WBO champions. These things are not coincidence. This^^^^^^

I am amazed you have the confidence in an opinion that the IBF isn't corrupt &/or incompetent. I am legit impressed you are bold enough to suggest that isn't the case. Respect for your ability to manipulate my argument doe. Maybe you do work with the IBF cuz you are excellent in selling bs. And like I said end the debate & make a poll with the question I submitted in my last post & we will see what the consensus is. But we both know the result already which is why you won't. Most/all of them are corrupt and rankings can be manipulated by certain promoters. It's no coincidence that nearly all Hearn's champions are IBF champs. Joshua, Brook, DeGale, Selby and probably more. Stephen Smith is another of his guys who just lost an IBF title fight on Saturday, but he got his shot through Eddie IBF Hearn. The same way people used to joke and call the WBO The "Warren Boxing Organisation" because he always got his fighters shots at WBO and they could defend it against poor fighters for years. He still does in fact, Terry Flanagan, Saunders, Liam Smith. All Warren fighters and currently WBO champions. These things are not coincidence.

Eff pandas on the catching end of a Tijuana donkey show in this argument ladies and gentlemen. Someone in his corner please throw in the towel lmao

Maybe the IBF means well, but it's not doing well. Stripping Fury was just a very dumb move. I appreciate that they stuck to their word but it just doesn't fit with reality. The other orgs will excuse you for 10 years from fighting a mandatory if you can give them big fights instead. Fury has a mandatory, contractual rematch with an ATG heavyweight champion and they strip him like a week later, end up with CHARLES MARTIN as their heavyweight champion. That guys like on the periphery of the top 100. Gotta be something in the middle. They don't have basic exceptions for unifications an rematch clauses and whatnot when its of lineal world HW title magnitude?

It's very simple. The IBF is the only governing body that follows their rules and doesn't give preferential treatment to top fighters. Because they don't break the rules to help top fighters, top fighters prefer to fight for other organizations instead. The IBF ranks the best fighters that are interested in fighting for the IBF. The IBF rankings are honest and fair. The problem is that top fighters aren't going to be interested in honest and fair when they can fight for other organizations that are willing to bend the rules for them. Fans should just stop recognizing the IBF & WBO as "world" titles. They were created in the 1980s out of thin air and have no claim to the lineage of the sport. The historical world championships, with a hundred year history (IBU, NYSAC, NBA & NSC) are represented by the WBC & WBA. Fans and media should have never allowed promoters to cram the IBF & WBO down their throat. Two world titles was already too much as it was. We should stop recognizing world titles all together. One lineal champ per division is plenty.

In the corrupt world of boxing a straight shooter like the IBF actually gets in the way and becomes a hindrance. This. The IBF calls it as it is and enforces their own rules. And because most of boxing is bent, this means the IBF is doing it to their own detriment. We should absolutely be applauding an org that isn't as corrupt as the promoters who manipulate everyone else.

WBA have 4 titles at each weight. WBC allow fighters to hold on to a a title forever if your face and pocket book fits. WBO will engineer truly embarrassing mandatories. Personally I would bin the lot and start again.

I'll focus on this situation cuz this is the one I've been looking into. Here's the evolution of Porky Medina's move up the rankings. J'Leon Love is ranked #15, Porky Medina is unranked. Porky Medina KO's J'Leon Love on Aug. 30, 2014 Porky Medina enters the IBF rankings at #15 I'd be curious to see the rankings for September-November 2014. But let's start here since its reasonable that Porky would take over the #15 spot after beating the guy who was previously in that spot. Looking at the list of ratings for the month of August 2014 there are logical explanations for why some of the fighters in front of Medina might have dropped. Carl Froch (retired) Christopher Rebrasse (lost to George Groves) Brandon Gonzalez (inactive, hasn't fought since May 2014) Maxim Vlasov (lost to Gilberto Ramirez) George Groves (signed to fight for WBC world title against Badou Jack) Derek Edwards (lost to Andre Dirrell) Robert Stieglitz (signed to fight for WBO world title) Alexander Brand (signed to fight for WBF (?) world title) The only ones I can't figure out are Mouhamed Ali Ndiaye and Rocky Fielding. Maybe it has to do with their choice of opponents....I would have to read through the entire IBF rulebook to be sure. But so far I don't see anything too suspect there. Am I wrong?

They have the worst ranking system i have ever seen...fighters who win the IBF are forced into a career of fighting mandatory c class fighters Funny you mention that Larry. I was actually looking up the different sanctitionig bodies rankings and I was able to find all except the ibf. Oh well time to go the way of UFC and have only one belt. Makes for better matches

I'm not talking about the guys who are ranked being a problem. I'm saying the rankings of the guys ranked by the IBF is a problem. Most notably @ 168 Porky Medina doesn't deserve to be ranked as the #3 guy/#1 unearned position guy in any non-corrupt, non-incompetent rankings that include the listed fighters we both are looking at based on what he has done. And I brought up other obvious problems with other divisions with the guys the IBF has seem worthy of being ranked by them. I'm not an expert on this but I have to assume that Porky Medina is there because he beat J'Leon Love who was undefeated at the time and probably highly ranked by the IBF. You did bring up the heavyweight division as well but as was already explained Klitschko turned down a fight for the IBF title in favor of a rematch with Fury. So he's out of the rankings. Luis Ortiz is champ for another organization so he's out of the rankings too. Erkan Teper is in the rankings because he beat Duhaupas for the IBF Inter Continental heavyweight title. Unless proven otherwise I have to assume that is included in their rules for how regional and cross-regional competitions allow boxers to work their way up the ratings.

Nope, it's not up to them. There's no international boxers union or anything, so fighters that choose not pay their fees and get rankings would be putting themselves and their careers at a disadvantage against fighters who choose not to boycott.

Yea Bute's promoter is the problem not these bs rankings lol. I'd avoid the question too if I was arguing that the IBF isn't corrupt or incompetent too I guess so fair play with the cryptic non-answer. Did you see that Berchelt plans to sue the WBO because he was passed over for his mandatory shot so that Lomachenko can get it instead? That doesn't happen with the IBF which is why Bob Arum prefers to channel his fighters away from them and towards other groups like the WBO instead. This is precisely why the IBF ratings are so barren of talent....he isn't the only promoter who operates this way. In the corrupt world of boxing a straight shooter like the IBF actually gets in the way and becomes a hindrance.

The IBF has the power to force Brook vs Spence. Now enforcing their rules will pay off.

Feel free to explain the below ranking among the guys willing to fight for the IBF title & not include the words corruption or incompetence. Those are the guys willing to fight for the IBF title and willing to move up the rankings based on the IBF requirements. You won't see Lucian Bute suddenly shoot to the top 5 just because of who promotes him.

This thread is about the IBF. I would hope most boxing fans agree ALL THE ALPHABET GROUPS are corrupt (or incompetent) to one degree or another. To me arguing these alphabet groups against each other is like arguing the best serial killer or the worst gang rape when all the things up for discussion are a problem. Yeah and I'm pointing out the IBF's rankings are not the worst, it's the WBA by a big distance. The alphabet orgs are a problem. But half the reason they exist is the rampant corruption that existed when there was only one clear championship to fight for. They're a symptom of a deeper lack of control and authority in the sport.

40% of the WBA's top 5 ranked fighters aren't even in the top 10 of ANY of the other organisations - http://bbboc.co.uk/hall-of-shame Between that and their regular/super title bullshit the WBA are by far the worst.

The WBC does make allowances for certain fighters. Especially if they're Mexican. The WBO actually dropped Austin Trout from their rankings altogether for a month, conveniently so that Liam Smith could skip over him and get a title shot. They claimed it was accidental and "an oversight." The WBA is full of retardation. Look how they stripped Rigondeaux for inactivity and made him "champion in recess," giving the top spot to Quigg instead. But one of the reasons Rigo was so inactive was because none of the top guys like Quigg would fight him in the first place! The IBF rules are quite clear and transparent in comparison. Their rankings might be awful at times but that's just because the promoters know they can manipulate things better with the other alphabet groups so they prefer to go there instead. the WBO is the worst imo. it's completely unnecessary and basically just a proxy for bob arum and frank warren. it has worse ratings than the IBF and more ****ery than the WBC