Where do you rank The Ring champs among the alphabet titles?

[GhostofDempsey]

Do you consider the Ring title as significant as the WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO? Same, better, worse?

[QueensburyRules]

Do you consider the Ring title as significant as the WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO? Same, better, worse?

- - Under Nat, it was considered the Defacto Lineal title.

Afterwards and more especially under Oscar and Doogie, it's The Clown title these days though Usyk may be able to remake it in his own image.

[Willow The Wisp]

The sheer number of titles, the shallow roots of the sanctioning bodies, the proprietary way that fighters are chosen to contest for them, and the ease at which titles are stripped have rendered ABC titles as little more than a line on the fight poster helping to market a fight.
It's the fighter who makes the title as much as it is the other way around. They have no lineage or pedigree, but they do represent something to shoot for in hopes of better exposure and bigger purses. It should go without saying that if each weight class had a single title and they were administered with integrity, their value would be far greater.
When the Ring (with whom I've enjoyed a long association) opted to believe Tyson Fury's retirement banter and move on; and away from the lineage they first joined with Jack Dempsey; their position as something above the fray vanished, and they lost something that was very tough to piece back togeter following the debacle of 1977, where Don King stated to the media, “I needed their reputation and their ratings and their sanction to give validity and authority to the tournament”. For a lousy 5 grand, King surely got all of that and a bag of chips.

So who ever said that professional brain bashing would be a sophisticated business above reproach?

[The D3vil]

Well, generally, it's the defacto "lineal" title, so it's a little better than the ABC titles.

It's only held by guys who fight the best in the division, generally.

[Willie Pep 229]

The sheer number of titles, the shallow roots of the sanctioning bodies, the proprietary way that fighters are chosen to contest for them, and the ease at which titles are stripped have rendered ABC titles as little more than a line on the fight poster helping to market a fight.
It's the fighter who makes the title as much as it is the other way around. They have no lineage or pedigree, but they do represent something to shoot for in hopes of better exposure and bigger purses. It should go without saying that if each weight class had a single title and they were administered with integrity, their value would be far greater.
When the Ring (with whom I've enjoyed a long association) opted to believe Tyson Fury's retirement banter and move on; and away from the lineage they first joined with Jack Dempsey; their position as something above the fray vanished, and they lost something that was very tough to piece back togeter following the debacle of 1977, where Don King stated to the media, “I needed their reputation and their ratings and their sanction to give validity and authority to the tournament”. For a lousy 5 grand, King surely got all of that and a bag of chips.

So who ever said that professional brain bashing would be a sophisticated business above reproach?

True Don King did forever damage to The Ring Magazine, but in the end didn't his tournament fall apart when the fraud records were exposed?

I thought (but could be very wrong) that the broadcasters walked away from him.

[QueensburyRules]

True Don King did forever damage to The Ring Magazine, but in the end didn't his tournament fall apart when the fraud records were exposed?

I thought (but could be very wrong) that the broadcasters walked away from him.

- - DKing gave HBO it's first inroads as major American broadcasters had to walk away from the obvious orchestration of King fights by refs, judges, and commishes, and so here we be today with new faces same as the old faces as humankind as expressed in boxing fails to evolve in a postive way, preferring the low brow devolution of endless exploitation.

[Marchegiano]

May not be a popular opinion but I don't really care about Ring, TBRB, IBF, or WBO titles. IBF and WBO for undisputed or unified, sure, but when they're all spread out then I don't really see and IBF holder as a champion or a WBO holder as a champion. WBA/C have history, lineage, etc.

Ring and TBRB I never care about. Those are not real titles, they don't have mandatories and so not a real championship. Their ratings are opinion. Which, is fine, it's cool to have alt ratings but since their ratings don't actually mean anything nor does their title.

For example, at HW they have Usyk ... which I dunno when that happened, I thought it was Fury but they have Usyk on their site atm. Anyway their 1 rank is Tyson. It's cool for them to say in their opinion Usyk's the most respectable HW and Tyson's second only to Usyk, but, until they say Usyk's number one contender is Tyson and if Usyk does not fight Fury they're going to strip Usyk then IDGAF about their title.

It's very flighty, even more flighty than the bodies. You may not agree with lesser belts and how people get their ratings but at least they do have mandatories. ... eventually.

[QueensburyRules]

May not be a popular opinion but I don't really care about Ring, TBRB, IBF, or WBO titles. IBF and WBO for undisputed or unified, sure, but when they're all spread out then I don't really see and IBF holder as a champion or a WBO holder as a champion. WBA/C have history, lineage, etc.

Ring and TBRB I never care about. Those are not real titles, they don't have mandatories and so not a real championship. Their ratings are opinion. Which, is fine, it's cool to have alt ratings but since their ratings don't actually mean anything nor does their title.

For example, at HW they have Usyk ... which I dunno when that happened, I thought it was Fury but they have Usyk on their site atm. Anyway their 1 rank is Tyson. It's cool for them to say in their opinion Usyk's the most respectable HW and Tyson's second only to Usyk, but, until they say Usyk's number one contender is Tyson and if Usyk does not fight Fury they're going to strip Usyk then IDGAF about their title.

It's very flighty, even more flighty than the bodies. You may not agree with lesser belts and how people get their ratings but at least they do have mandatories. ... eventually.

- - Ring kept Blubber Ring Champ for 3 years where he defended vs noone...NOONE...

[Willow The Wisp]

- - Ring kept Blubber Ring Champ for 3 years where he defended vs noone...NOONE...

Extending the same courtesy they had extended to Ali during his time away, until Frazier lifted the title from him in 71'. Thus far, nobody has managed that with Fury, although the very best to have campaigned in this decade have tried. Fury was stripped and arbitrarily replaced when the editors were duped by one of Fury's short lived "retirement" pronouncements, After Fury had come back and reestablished himself as the premier heavyweight in the game. The integrity of the Ring is no longer what it once was. That move was not agendasized; just a neophyte blooper. Fury traces to James Figg. Usyk to Charles Martin.

[Dr. Z]

Do you consider the Ring title as significant as the WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO? Same, better, worse?

Better. Sometimes much better.