The Vacant "Ring" HW Title

[Technical_Skill]

The last hw to hold the "Ring" title was former WBC champ Vitali Klitscko and when he retired due to injury, by default he vacated the title... Since then(about 2+ years) the Ring hasn't crowned a hw champion and doesn't seem to be in the process of doing so now.

So, my questions are, why hasn't the Ring crowned a new champ? What will it take for one of the many current champs to win this title? And does this title bring any legitimacy to the champion who holds it even though not unified?

I personally done care too much about the ring belt,

Wladimr Klitschko is the real HW champ,

He beats anyone at that weight,

and thats all that matters

[77Ritchie77]

so when wlad fought chris byrd... who wasn't in the top three wlad who just came off his sam peter victory, or byrd, who hadn't lost since wlad beat him?

[kayjay]

I think that the ring should consider revising its rules to include a figher who unifies two or more of the 4 major titles. I mean if Klitschko were to unify the IBF-WBO or WBA titles right now, I think that's enough to earn him the ring title...

Aside from their rules, does the "Ring" title really mean anything?

BVut then you'd have situations where two fighters in the same division could satisfy that criterion (Calghage-Kessler), or the possibility of a clearly inferior fighter getting two alphabet titles. Like what if Ibragimov were to beat Briggs (I don't see it happeneing, bt . . ) and then face Chagaev. That would be unification, but not the crowning of a real champ.

[crold1]

Wlad actually was higher than ten when he faced Byrd...but don't forget that before Peter he had looked garbage for a long time. Williamson had him down and Brewster beat him. Wlad isn't 'the real champ' just yet and his history says that he's never a guarantee to beat anyone he fights. Dude has a loss to Ross Purrity.

[Derranged_]

Very good posts guys; I guess this was one of my better threads... But the ironic thing is that everyone's trying to get their hands on the WBA, WBC, WBO, and IBF titles when the Ring title is probably the most credible and doesn't charge fighters sanctioning fees!!!! (at least I don't think; correct me if I'm wrong)

[crold1]

Yeah, but the alphabet belts are still a great negotiating ploy. Kessler could never have any leverage in negotiuating for fights with Cal and Taylor without those two otherwise grabge belts. In speaking with Mogens Palle a couple weeks ago, he consistently referenced the belts.

[Southpaw16]

http://www.iboboxing.com/

It is too bad that the IBO isn't one of the prominent boxing titles. Check it out. They have an unbiased computer system for rankings. I think this is a great idea. The ratings that come out generally look pretty fair.

[Derranged_]

http://www.iboboxing.com/

It is too bad that the IBO isn't one of the prominent boxing titles. Check it out. They have an unbiased computer system for rankings. I think this is a great idea. The ratings that come out generally look pretty fair.

Yeah, that's all we need, another sanctioning body... Boxrec uses an 'unbiased' computer system for its ranking and they're totally out of this world.

[crold1]

I've argued in the past that boxing would be best off with a system equivalent to the BCS. Computer components for objectivity with a press input for the top ten and a strong return to lineage in titles.

[kayjay]

http://www.iboboxing.com/

It is too bad that the IBO isn't one of the prominent boxing titles. Check it out. They have an unbiased computer system for rankings. I think this is a great idea. The ratings that come out generally look pretty fair.

Look at who holds their belts, though; it's a **** list really.