Al haymon to revoke recognition of the wbo

Weird. ......

Nobody is monopolizing but Haymon and keeping guys from losing to keep him afloat. If you check the actual records Haymons guys take L's a lot to competing promotions. Lucky he has kept Wilder off the radar so long and now has very winnable fights but keep in mind he lost to Fury and was lucky it was in the U.S. You guys are the fan boys that fight which network is better,i'll pass and enjoy much better Dazn product which is far easier and fan friendly with fighters I do like better on it,and then ESPN plus that also shows some Warren fighters. . Fighters are the ones going for the better business but YOU call it monopolizing. Al's fighters are not losing because of Al, Al just has the better fighters. The only L's PBC Fighters are taking are from each other cuz they stay whooping every other promotion & THAT'S why they are afraid of the PBC Fighters. The promoters like bob arum & eddie hearn know this that's why he doesn't do the deals, shet eddie trying to get Al's fighter AND so was Oscar ALONG with bob! :rofl: If D.Wilder didn't get the 2 knock downs then I would agree with you but he DID & the fight was close so the draw was right. You the fanboy supporting all that is wrong with boxing today..dazn has Nelo, Devin Haney (PBC Fighter hearn signed :lol1:) & Boo Boo, THAT'S IT. espn has Bud & fury, THAT'S IT. :cool2: Keep holding them L's homie! :lol1:

Franchise belt is only another way to manipulate fights by the WBC/Haymon . Giving a belt doesn't mean its staying there. It might make it look good for now but a great way to duck actual relevant fights in the future. Please elaborate on Haymon's involvement with the franchise belt

PBC is a closeted WBC program we all know that. He doesn't expand his fighters much and wants to run WBC so not sure what people want ? Ha Sure. Must be why they've only given a Golden Boy fighter a franchise belt.

Needs to back to one belt only SCREW ANY PROMOTER trying to call shots on any of the titles . TopRank PBC all of them.

Very weak on the part of the PBC/Haymon group. The fact of the matter is that Crawford IS UNIVERSALLY ranked #1 or #2 P4P in the world. He aint going NOWHERE and true boxing analysts, sports networks etc., will show that from now until he either retires or loses.

I had no idea that they recognized the IBO over there. I don’t recall it ever being mentioned over here except as a joke (Eubank Jr showing off with it) Gary Shaw was pushing the IBO hard on Showtime for a while, but once Showtime got Haymon, they had access to plenty of recognized belts and their flirtation with the IBO was over. In the UK, the WBU and IBO were briefly gaining recognition at different points, until Sky began refusing to buy anything other than the big four.

And the circus continues, just a way to monopolize further. From my understanding this is being done because for some odd reason (Arum and Warren) there are very few PBC fighters in the WBO rankings. Not that I care about networks or sanctioning bodies really. The IBF seem like the only respectable one lately....

And the circus continues, just a way to monopolize further. But YOU would be happy if it was bob or hearn monopolizing though :lol1:

Idk if it'll accomplish anything but the WBO have been controlled by Arum and Warren for years. The president of the WBO even testified against Haymon in court a few years ago. And that didn't help them either....they keep taking L's when they mess with Al, T.B.E. & PBC :lol1:

Nnot really relevant... it's not like fans go to Fox and Showtime to find out who the champions are. Networks occasionally show a graphic showing all the belt-holders in the division before a title fight, so what if they want to leave off the WBO? Personally I think boxing is too big to have proper world champions without an international governing body like Fifa. I'd be happy if one of the major players (TR, PBC, or DAZN) was able to gain a practical monopoly and create their own belt like UFC. Let America have its champions, let Europe have theirs, etc. and then let them meet in special unifications. Everyone would make more money, the titles would be more credible, and the sport would be healthier. Too many belts. This isn't soccer either.

I had no idea that they recognized the IBO over there. I don’t recall it ever being mentioned over here except as a joke (Eubank Jr showing off with it)

Less belts the better.

Throw in the IBO as well.

I think it's stupid. Just not saying WBO doesn't exist doesn't make it true. Crawford is still a world champion. You can just snap your fingers and make him not a world champion.The WBO is one of the big 4 along with the IBF WBC and the WBA. They are all about equally important or unimportant however you look at it. Why though? Say what you want about them, the WBC, WBA, and IBF have known legacies that extend back years; the IBF may be the youngest at 30. What actually made the WBO a viable world organization, beyond being the organization that sanctioned the fights that Warren and Arum couldn't get sanctioned? Treat the WBO as what it is, and the fans will see it for what it is.

I never heard of the IBO as a top titel. Is it a brittish thing?

The IBO was never a top title. Sky treated it as such . . . until they didn't. TV networks make or break a sanctioning body. Always have. When Sky stopped recognizing the IBO, the IBO never recovered.

I support PBC if this is case. I hope DAZN /Hearn and ESPN/Arum follow suit. The less belts in Boxing the better imo.

If networks don't show your champions, then it makes said championships irrelevant by proxy. Thus why the IBO - which is NEVER featured anymore despite once being a top title - is rendered obsolete. It's fine though. Crawford can still face B-levels on ESPN. But until he signs his life over to Uncle Al and Floyd Mayweather...it's time to effectively retire that WBO. The IBO was never a top title.

Isn't WBO the one that Pac had for years?