Want A RINGing Endorsement? Sanction Dawson-Johnson II

[HeartAttack]

1. He's no more a detriment to the sport than these other "champs" who simply division shop looking for the biggest payday they can get, without clearing out any divisions.

2. 135 was JMM's?? Uhmmm, Pac fought David Diaz for the WBC 135 title, and then JMM moved up to 135 to chase Pac. Clearly Pac-Nate should have been made at that time to settle 135, since Nate had the other 3 titles (and Casa refused to fight Nate). But Pac took the payday with DLH instead, and never came back to 135. JMM only claimed 135 by default, because of Pac moving up again and Casa refusing the Nate fight.

3. Manny has no intention of defending the 140 title now, or ever. He'll fight Cotto, Floyd, or whoever represents the biggest payday, at weights over 140. And since Ring doesn't require defenses, he will not vacate it. And Nate will smash Bradley, but we can debate that part later....lol

1.) Your pissed about something, not sure what, but something to do with someone not fighting one of your guys I imagine. We aren't talking about other fighters, we are talking about Zsolt Erdei, and his detrimental career.

2.) You already know from our previous discussions that I give no credence to sanctioning bodies and their ability to tax fighters for no goddamn reason to fight. Fighters work hard as hell to earn their money and their hardwork and dedication is suffice enough payment to be called world champions. So with that, Casamayor was the true champion of the division, and whether or not he fought your boy is inconsequential to the fact that Juan Manuel Marquez knocked out Joel Casamayor to become the 135lb champion. Manny Pacquiao and his bull**** WBC trinket be damned, you want Manny in the ring with Nate, and I don't blame you. That doesn't take the title away from Marquez though

3.)The Ring and linear titles don't strip champions for a good damn reason, you win a belt in the ring only, and you lose it the same way, unless you give it up. If Manny doesn't intend to defend the 140lb title in his career, a simple utterance of such takes care of your problem. As for Bradley/Campbell, I will refuse to discuss such, until an editor makes me. I'm not a big fan of Bradley and his fighting style, it does entertain me some though, I am a HUGE fan of his willingness to fight anyone, anywhere, anytime, especially at such an early age in his career. I like Nate, I will always stand by Nate. He is a true boxing man that so few can comprehend. He is boxing, he is at all the fights down here and cheers on all combatants in main events or walk-out bouts. Always willing to talk to fans and media alike and is knowledgable in all aspects of the sport. I give few fighters this much respect, because I am suppsoed to stay objective, but the sport could use a lot more Nate Campbells. I respect both fighters too much to really dig at either one adn try to figure who will beat who. They both possess a tough challenge for one another.

[Dave Rado]

At this stage, Pac is no different than Erdie. his main motivation is money. Plain and simple.

Pac had eight fights against the best possible opposition at 130, including against three sure-fire future hall of famers. Subsequently, the worst opponent he has faced was ranked #4 in his division. Erdei has only once fought anyone ranked in the top 10 in his division, and that was back in 2004.

[OnePunch]

Pac had eight fights against the best possible opposition at 130, including against three sure-fire future hall of famers. Subsequently, the worst opponent he has faced was ranked #4 in his division. Erdei has only once fought anyone ranked in the top 10 in his division, and that was back in 2004.

The necessity (and/or credibility) of Morales 3, Barerra 2, Solis, and Larios can be debated.

[OnePunch]

1.) Your pissed about something, not sure what, but something to do with someone not fighting one of your guys I imagine. We aren't talking about other fighters, we are talking about Zsolt Erdei, and his detrimental career.

2.) You already know from our previous discussions that I give no credence to sanctioning bodies and their ability to tax fighters for no goddamn reason to fight. Fighters work hard as hell to earn their money and their hardwork and dedication is suffice enough payment to be called world champions. So with that, Casamayor was the true champion of the division, and whether or not he fought your boy is inconsequential to the fact that Juan Manuel Marquez knocked out Joel Casamayor to become the 135lb champion. Manny Pacquiao and his bull**** WBC trinket be damned, you want Manny in the ring with Nate, and I don't blame you. That doesn't take the title away from Marquez though

3.)The Ring and linear titles don't strip champions for a good damn reason, you win a belt in the ring only, and you lose it the same way, unless you give it up. If Manny doesn't intend to defend the 140lb title in his career, a simple utterance of such takes care of your problem. As for Bradley/Campbell, I will refuse to discuss such, until an editor makes me. I'm not a big fan of Bradley and his fighting style, it does entertain me some though, I am a HUGE fan of his willingness to fight anyone, anywhere, anytime, especially at such an early age in his career. I like Nate, I will always stand by Nate. He is a true boxing man that so few can comprehend. He is boxing, he is at all the fights down here and cheers on all combatants in main events or walk-out bouts. Always willing to talk to fans and media alike and is knowledgable in all aspects of the sport. I give few fighters this much respect, because I am suppsoed to stay objective, but the sport could use a lot more Nate Campbells. I respect both fighters too much to really dig at either one adn try to figure who will beat who. They both possess a tough challenge for one another.

1. I'm pissed about how some fighters get criticized for their actions, while others (who happen to be the flavor of the month) can do no wrong, when in reality they are doing the exact same ****.

2. I'm 50-50 on the sanctioning bodies. Right now I like the IBF and WBO, but could do without the WBC and WBA. But to say fighters shouldn't pay them is absurd. No one can argue the fact that having the title, or being the mandatory challenger to a title, gives a fighter opportunities they might not otherwise get. Do you think for one minute that if not for his title that Kotelnik would be getting the Khan fight? Juan Diaz wouldn't have fought Nate in 100 years if Nate hadn't been the IBF mandatory at the time. Also, if not for the title would David Diaz have gotten the Pac fight? Please. And did Pac not use the WBC 135 title as a means to market himself as a "5 division champ? (or 4 division, depending on who you talk to) And is he not about to use Cotto's belt (if he beats Cotto, which I doubt) to call himself a 7 division champ? Having the titles allows fighters to make more money, and I dont really think that paying 3% to the sanctioning body is really excessive.

3. The Ring title for me means little because I cant give credibility to any title that never has to be defended against a top competitor. And since Pac doesnt have to pay a sanction, what incentive is there for him to vacate it? Because he's a good samaritan? Give me a break. Since Pavlik won it 2 years ago, he's fought 4 times, and NEVER against a top rated middleweight. For a title to be credible, it must be defended against a top competitor. And how credible can a title be if 12 of the 17 divisions are vacant?

I appreciate your comments on Nate, but I'm curious about something. Bradley-Campbell is a helluva fight, so why would an editor have to "make" you talk about it? That seems odd........

[HeartAttack]

1. I'm pissed about how some fighters get criticized for their actions, while others (who happen to be the flavor of the month) can do no wrong, when in reality they are doing the exact same ****.

2. I'm 50-50 on the sanctioning bodies. Right now I like the IBF and WBO, but could do without the WBC and WBA. But to say fighters shouldn't pay them is absurd. No one can argue the fact that having the title, or being the mandatory challenger to a title, gives a fighter opportunities they might not otherwise get. Do you think for one minute that if not for his title that Kotelnik would be getting the Khan fight? Juan Diaz wouldn't have fought Nate in 100 years if Nate hadn't been the IBF mandatory at the time. Also, if not for the title would David Diaz have gotten the Pac fight? Please. And did Pac not use the WBC 135 title as a means to market himself as a "5 division champ? (or 4 division, depending on who you talk to) And is he not about to use Cotto's belt (if he beats Cotto, which I doubt) to call himself a 7 division champ? Having the titles allows fighters to make more money, and I dont really think that paying 3% to the sanctioning body is really excessive.

3. The Ring title for me means little because I cant give credibility to any title that never has to be defended against a top competitor. And since Pac doesnt have to pay a sanction, what incentive is there for him to vacate it? Because he's a good samaritan? Give me a break. Since Pavlik won it 2 years ago, he's fought 4 times, and NEVER against a top rated middleweight. For a title to be credible, it must be defended against a top competitor. And how credible can a title be if 12 of the 17 divisions are vacant?

I appreciate your comments on Nate, but I'm curious about something. Bradley-Campbell is a helluva fight, so why would an editor have to "make" you talk about it? That seems odd........

1.) everyone who refuses to fight the best when they are champions get lambasted, but those (we all know your beef is with Pacquiao) champions who fight the best that they can no matter the weightclass will be rightfully praised. Pacquiao finished his business at 130lb when he "won" the linear title in his rematch with Marquez (yes, I thought JMM won, but the results still stand). So you might want Manny to fight just in one division, sorry dude, I'd rather see him go after the bigger fish and come back to his division and defend if he so chooses. The 140lb division will offer him only one intriguing fight, and that will be the winner of Bradley/Campbell. So truth be told, it doesn't really behoove (I honestly don't think I've ever used that word before, and probably have yet to spell it correctly) Pacquiao to stick around at 140. Thus he should just declare he is vacating the title like he did with the 130lb crown. Until then, he can fight whoever he wants in whatever weoght division he so desires as long as he keeps bringing positive attention to his career and the sport and is competitive against the best out there.

2.)Riddle me this, how did fights ever get made before 1972? What did fighters do to make money? We had champions before then, sometimes with long periods of inactivity and sometimes against weak opposition, and sometimes the best fought each other 5 times and Champions fought 10 times a year. Contenders always seemed to find each other in the ring and just like nowadays there were issues with promoters and contracts, but safety was worse and the MAFIA was apart of boxing. However, sanctioning bodies have given us nothing. 15-12 rounds for the "safety" of the fighters, Jose Sulaiman, and promoters gaining more control based on who they paid to get their fighters ranked. More guys got "title shots" which is worthless because they were for trinket titles. And Nate holding 3 paper belts had to pay 9% of his purse to sanctiong bodies, thats bull****, and he wasn't even the champion. Before sanctioning bodies, contenders fought each other to get recognized instead of waiting to be ranked by one body or the other. Champions didn't get stripped because they chose one organization and there was something the sport has lacked greatly, clarity. So good sir, *** the alphabet bastards, they mean shi.t to me and my sport.

3.)your killing me with that Pac not having to pay a sanction bullshet. Thats the point, it's supposed to be the belt makes the champion, not the other way around. No need to thank me about the comments and Nate, I look forward to talking to him after fights, sometimes other writers and fighters are annoying due to their vanity and ignorance. Nate shoots striaght and is knowledgable, can't go wrong with that. As for the fight, I'll have a piece up tomorrow or Thursday (whenever I write it) about the fight, but I won't debate the two quite yet. It deserves attention.

[Dave Rado]

3. The Ring title for me means little because I cant give credibility to any title that never has to be defended against a top competitor.

And yet you say you like the WBO despite the fact that Erdei has defended his WBO belt ten times without fighting a single top competitor!

[BennyST]

I disagree. I'll justify it.

Hopkins, the champion, lost a close decision to Calzaghe to keep his ranking. This alone you could argue, wouldn't be enough. This further was strengthened when Hopkins dominated Pavlik. It might have been a catchweight of 170, but that's still the Light Heavyweight limit. Also Pavlik has the frame of carrying up the weight well.

Not to mention, Hopkins' win over Pavlik has been more impressive then anything Dawson has done late. Dawson certainly didn't look more impressive against Tarver (either time) then Hopkins did. He didn't even give out a bigger beating and Hopkins-Tarver was 3 years ago. Dawson also didn't look as impressive against johnson as Hopkins did either, but that was a prime Bhop, so that's not fair to judge specifically.

Based off a close decision loss, a dominant win over Pavlik, and looking better against Dawson's competition as of late, was/is enough for him to be ranked over Dawson.

HOWEVER, I do agree with the general point of the article. Hopkins doesn't seem to have any interest in fighting Dawson or the winner of this fight (or in general, besides maybe Adamek). I don't think they should strip him of the #1 ranking, but they should ask him if they can or ask him if he is going to retire. They asked one of their champions (I think it was Manny P at 130) to vacate the title and that person did, so Hopkins might be willing to give up his number 1 spot.

It's five pounds off the LHW limit and only two off the SMW limit. It's closer to a SMW fight than anything.

Anyway, as for the article. It does bring up good points. There is no point in keeping someone ranked when they are very obviously not going to fight anyone at that weight in which he is ranked 1st, therefore they should just get on with it and rank the next highest fighter or the guy that actually deserves to be ranked numero uno anyway. That being Dawson.

Hopkins isn't going to do anything at LHW. As stated he will only look for the biggest $ fight against the easiest opponent and that may never even really come about anyway, or certainly not in the next six months it would seem.

One problem with this is that it just pushes the fact that if you are a top guy in the sport you can basically do what you want while keeping title and rankings which you don't really deserve. It's like this Pac/Cotto fight that may come up. Because Pac is the big dog at the moment he can say I want the fight at 143 but it will be for the WW title, even though it's not at the WW limit. So, he's getting some amazing ranking for not actually doing it properly.

I think this all started with Leonard's fame back when he fought LaLonde for the LHW fight, even though it was at the SMW limit. LaLonde was known to struggle with the LHW limit but he was obviously offered so much % that he was never going to refuse and it gave Leonard the chance at winning a LHW title without ever fighting at LHW and, even better, fighting a guy that was coming in highly over-trained and dried up.

It's starting to become the norm now. If you have the fame, you can keep rankings and titles and get new ones without actually doing the work necessary or fighting the fights that would actually give them to you.

[Spray_resistant]

Whether or not Erdei is the best light heavyweight in the world is moot, because he is the champion and The Ring belt would be relatively meaningless unless it was around his waist, as it was when it was around Vitali's. It's time for Erdei to step up and defend his title against the best. Sven Ottke's career has become a punchline because of the gift decisions and relatively soft opposition he faced while never leaving Germany, and it would be a shame if the same would happen to Erdei's.

Your actually right about Erdei, which is pretty sad. Its funny how in boxing if you want to be truly objective you have to acknowledge something like a Ring Championship in this particular case as truth when in reality everyone knows it to be completely false.