Does a no-contest count as a title defense?

[Sweet Jesus]

I'm pretty sure it does but I'm looking for clarification.

[Jim Jeffries]

I'm not positive and I wouldn't think it would, but people do tend to count Hopkins' first fight with Robert Allen as a legitimate title defense.

[Chief2ndzOnly!]

If I'm not mistaken it is.

[Sweet Jesus]

I'm not positive and I wouldn't think it would, but people do tend to count Hopkins' first fight with Robert Allen as a legitimate title defense.

Yes. I've only seen one instance of BoxRec not treating a no contest as a title defense. At the same time, if a draw is a title defense, I don't really see anything wrong with a no contest being a title defense too. As long as there is an opening bell.

[Wild Blue Yonda]

Not sure off-hand what the correct answer is, but I absolutely believe an NC should not be counted towards title defenses. Looks pretty self-evident to me.

[JAB5239]

Yes. I've only seen one instance of BoxRec not treating a no contest as a title defense. At the same time, if a draw is a title defense, I don't really see anything wrong with a no contest being a title defense too. As long as there is an opening bell.

Than again there are situations like Toney-Ruiz where Toney initially won only to have the official verdict made a ND because of testing positive for juice. Can we really count that as a title defense for John Ruiz?

[Sweet Jesus]

Than again there are situations like Toney-Ruiz where Toney initially won only to have the official verdict made a ND because of testing positive for juice. Can we really count that as a title defense for John Ruiz?

Ruiz didn't cheat.

Both BoxRec and Wikipedia credit Ruiz with a title defense for the no decision against Toney. Then again they are both user-edited websites so who knows...

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:929781

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WBA_world_champions#Heavyweight

[StarshipTrooper]

BoxRec isn't the final word on it. A no contest has traditionally been treated as if it never happend.....quite literally NO contest. Quite frankly I've never heard of no contests being treated as title defenses.

Poet

[JAB5239]

Ruiz didn't cheat.

Both BoxRec and Wikipedia credit Ruiz with a title defense for the no decision against Toney. Then again they are both user-edited websites so who knows...

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:929781
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ns#Heavyweight

What Im saying is Ruiz was thoroughly out boxed and beaten in that fight, Had Toney not tested positive the discussion would be moot. I just can't see a way to validate a successful defense in Ruiz's favor when he was clearly beaten, albeit by cheating. A no contest is the best decision, in my opinion, in this scenario.

[The_Demon]

BoxRec isn't the final word on it. A no contest has traditionally been treated as if it never happend.....quite literally NO contest. Quite frankly I've never heard of no contests being treated as title defenses.

Poet

Thats the way i see it aswell,although its open too interpretation i suppose