F*** the IBF rankings.

https://www.boxingscene.com/rankings/ Do they? They look like typical rankings to me. Yeah absolutely garbage rankings.

Buatsi past on Pascal then Pascal lost to Eifert. Their top 15 rankings look similar to everybody else's. Be mad at the bigger names for these mandos. No, I'm mad at the IBF for putting terrible fighters in these positions. Once again, if you can't get good fighters to contend for your belt, throw your belt away. You don't crown a "champion" just to fill a vacancy.

The IBF have a long history with corruption too. They're the least corrupt currently because the feds put them in their place. I'll take a sanctioning body that orders their mandatories over ones with interim champions while their full champions are active and WBC memorial day belts.

#1 contenders TBRB: Bivol Ring: Bivol WBC: Benavidez WBA: Morrell WBO: Yarde IBF: Eifert Their rankings are not fine. Their rankings are absolutely horrible. Eifert should never have even been put in an eliminator, and neither should Pascal. Pascal served a two year PED suspension and then beat one bum. You don't just put two guys in the ring to fill a vacancy. If nobody worthy is willing to contend for your belt, leave it vacant. Don't just hand it to the first guy willing to sign up to fight for it. Buatsi past on Pascal then Pascal lost to Eifert. Their top 15 rankings look similar to everybody else's. Be mad at the bigger names for these mandos.

The IBF have a long history with corruption too. All of these organizations have their own workings. Call a corruption, which there is plenty of, just call it idiosyncratic... None of them do any good for boxing. Boxing is a sport where guys have a win and loss record, and a relative scale pertaining to whom they have fought. There's no reason not to have one objective organization, at most two, to do the rankings. I know there is a national league and an American League in baseball. I know how many wins and losses each team has and I know at the end they will be a series to determine which team is the best. Boxing is not absolutely the same by any means but you could still have some objectivity in lieu of these sycophantic organizations.

https://www.boxingscene.com/rankings/ Do they? They look like typical rankings to me. The mere fact that there are so many different rankings should tell somebody all they need to know about all these alphabet groups. It's not like boxing is the same as having to judge the finest orchestras in the country. I mean the New York philharmonic versus the St Louis philharmonic doesn't have a win-loss record, doesn't have the same type of history but we're talking about a sport where guys win fights and lose fights. There should be one ranking system with clear criteria and a top five for each division.

What are you talking about with your straw man argument? I regularly criticize people who bring up belt rankings as if they matter matter or are legit. Don't lie about other people's positions. There are rare times when belts can force a good fight between top guys but their rankings are terrible and usually terrible fights come about from them. The wbo literally moved a dead guy up their rankings maybe you are referring to when I say so and so beat 12 top 10 fighters etc...that's ring rankings not belt rankings since the ring has historically had an independent panel of rankings for 100 years now nad is mostly credible, no eifert in there or all those bum wilder or tank opponents Let me be clear here. First of all I apologize if I did not clarify but you endorse rankings. Rankings really should not be necessary for the top five fighters in each division. The fans should have a basic understanding, or at least there should be a universal ranking independent of any organization, that shows the better fighters. Here's the problem Daggum: The mere fact that you have different alphabet groups with different rankings tells you something is wrong. When I go to watch the Red Sox play the White Sox there aren't three different standings... There is a standing of how many games each team has won, lost etc. You can have ranking systems but when it comes to the top of the division this should be a few fighters that are known to be the best about five at most. Anybody who endorses any sort of ranking, which you do endorse at times, it's using a relative system that is biased. There should be a measure above all others that designate the top fighters. The lineal has done this for the heavyweight division. Ps, I will tell you what I have told another poster that used to post here, look up the definition of straw man...

Alphabet soup again? Fans put up with it, idiots like Daggum endorse it, grow up people kick these sycophants out. What are you talking about with your straw man argument? I regularly criticize people who bring up belt rankings as if they matter matter or are legit. Don't lie about other people's positions. There are rare times when belts can force a good fight between top guys but their rankings are terrible and usually terrible fights come about from them. The wbo literally moved a dead guy up their rankings maybe you are referring to when I say so and so beat 12 top 10 fighters etc...that's ring rankings not belt rankings since the ring has historically had an independent panel of rankings for 100 years now nad is mostly credible, no eifert in there or all those bum wilder or tank opponents

The IBF have a long history with corruption too. They did until Bob Lee got caught along with Arum. Now since you can't buy your way to the top, and you have to defend you belt periodically against the #1 contender, de canelo's of the world don't like that type of commitment. Do you really think benavidez and Morrell jr were not offered something in return for leaving the ginger along?

Their rankings look fine. It's the no names who pursue the title shots so they're the ones who get them. #1 contenders TBRB: Bivol Ring: Bivol WBC: Benavidez WBA: Morrell WBO: Yarde IBF: Eifert Their rankings are not fine. Their rankings are absolutely horrible. Eifert should never have even been put in an eliminator, and neither should Pascal. Pascal served a two year PED suspension and then beat one bum. You don't just put two guys in the ring to fill a vacancy. If nobody worthy is willing to contend for your belt, leave it vacant. Don't just hand it to the first guy willing to sign up to fight for it.

Their rankings are better than the IBF’s. They're just as horrible. Only diff between those 2 sorry excuses for belt orgs is the ibf, regardless of their bs, follows their rules

I respect they follow their rules. My point is their rankings absolutely suck. https://www.boxingscene.com/rankings/ Do they? They look like typical rankings to me.

Their rankings are worthless so they should just fold up. If your system of rules consistently results in unworthy challengers, you have failed your mission as a sanctioning body. Their rankings look fine. It's the no names who pursue the title shots so they're the ones who get them.

Where's this same energy for the wbc and wba? Fcuk them the most! Their rankings are better than the IBF’s.

You only fold a failing business, which I guess they are not.

Where's this same energy for the wbc and wba? Fcuk them the most!

The belt doesn't define the fighter. The corrupt ones are the other three alphabet soups The IBF have a long history with corruption too.

The IBF are the only ones left that follow the rules. If fighters want title shots better fighters should be taking the IBF route. I respect they follow their rules. My point is their rankings absolutely suck.

Their rankings are worthless so they should just fold up. If your system of rules consistently results in unworthy challengers, you have failed your mission as a sanctioning body. Exactly, their rankings are an absolute disgrace. Are we really supposed to believe this unknown German and the ghost of Pascal are the two best available contenders in the division. Laughable!

The IBF are the only ones left that follow the rules. If fighters want title shots better fighters should be taking the IBF route. Their rankings are worthless so they should just fold up. If your system of rules consistently results in unworthy challengers, you have failed your mission as a sanctioning body.