forget the 147 ring belt........

[supermandathoe]

Petty thread, you say forget about the belt and then say they should give it to someone else. Contradicting yourself maybe? That being said Floyd is still the best WW in the world before or after july 26th, let him show you in the ring though.

[$ LegenD $]

u consider him the best WW in the world even though he hasn't beaten a top welter.....ok......i know it won't happen but rankings in boxing are getting worse with this crap.....oh well.....to me the winner that comes out july 26 is the best welterweight in the world until of course floyd proves me wrong which of course i would love for him to do so.......

[loui_ludwig]

Even though Golden Boy owns the Ring mag, i believe the Ring mag editors still follows their rule about the Ring belt. If GBP manipulates it, then the Ring belt and mag will be a joke. I would still buy the mag for the articles though.

[MANGLER]

The Ring wouldn't strip him and they wouldn't need to. Cotto vs Tony determines once and for all the #1 contender to Floyd and if he won't fight the winner no one but his huggers will still acknowledge him as bein the real champ anymore. The distinction would get passed to whoever wins that fight.

[$ LegenD $]

^^that pretty much sums it up.........

[Thread Stealer]

u consider him the best WW in the world even though he hasn't beaten a top welter.....ok......i know it won't happen but rankings in boxing are getting worse with this crap.....oh well.....to me the winner that comes out july 26 is the best welterweight in the world until of course floyd proves me wrong which of course i would love for him to do so.......

What is with people with their "it's getting so bad nowadays" nonsense? It's not any worse than numerous instances in past history.

Jack Dempsey held the HW title, the Ring recognized him, even though he hadn't defended his title in 3 years. James Braddock held the title for a full two years without even fighting, before losing to Joe Louis. You didn't see The Ring stripping Larry Holmes in the mid 80s for not defeating their #1 or #2 contenders.

[x3_bazooka_x3]

This is exactly why the Ring Magazine Championship is total ****, they allow you to sit on a title and hold the divison up much the way Lewis did after he fought Klitschko much the way Klitschko has done to avoid Rahman before he retired, and now the way Floyd has done for a long time now.
The WBC WBA and IBF along with the WBO might not be as appealing to some but the idea of forcing a mandotory is something that must be done in order to keep this sport real, we cant have champions just cherry picking I just dont understand why Ring hasnt changed that idea.

[warp1432]

Forcing a mandatory doesn't mean **** when the mandatory isn't the actual #1 contender.

You could easily sit on an alphabet title belt like you could the ring.

[Thread Stealer]

Forcing a mandatory doesn't mean **** when the mandatory isn't the actual #1 contender.

You could easily sit on an alphabet title belt like you could the ring.

They're both flawed.

You look at situations like Roy Jones-Rick Frazier or Bernard Hopkins-Morade Hakkar and it's just disgraceful.

A champ really should have to fight the top contender, but the organizations are corrupt.

In some situations though, what if a champ cannot fight the #1 contender? Let's say the champ is an exclusive HBO fighter and the #1 contender is exclusive on Showtime? Or if one of the promoters demands options on the other guy in the future? The Muhammad Ali reform act is supposed to help with promoters not being able to demand options, but they still do.