Would you rather have 20 Title Defenses with the "IBF" or "WBO"

[dde91]

like serious, A lot of Calzaghe nuthuggers say a fighter makes a belt. blah blah blah and all that bull**** to try to say the WBO belt is as good as the WBC, WBA, and IBF. Then they point out that Cotto and Clottey was for the WBO, but you everybody knows Cotto will try to unify for the MAJOR belts sooner or later, then keep the weak **** WBO belt for years.

I mean would you keep the WBO belt for ten years without trying to unify? Is that even greatness??

Or would you keep the IBF for ten years without unifying? It's a Major belt and having that belt for so long is greatness in itself

[MANGLER]

It's all about who you defend your belt against, not the simple fact that you defend a belt.

[F l i c k e r]

IBF.

The shimmer is what does it for me.

[dde91]

It's all about who you defend your belt against, not the simple fact that you defend a belt.

i understand that, but If you was to fight the Number one contenders from each belt for 20 defenses, which would you rather have?

[warp1432]

Why didn't you name the poll:

"Who do you prefer to beat on more" with the options being:

1. South Africans
2. Europeans

[dde91]

Why didn't you name the poll:

"Who do you prefer to beat on more" with the options being:

1. South Africans
2. Europeans

hahahahaahahahhaha good one

[F l i c k e r]

or




I'll take the shinier one.

[MANGLER]

i understand that, but If you was to fight the Number one contenders from each belt for 20 defenses, which would you rather have?

or




I'll take the shinier one.

Since you put it that way Flick, I think I'd take the IBF too homey.

[ßringer]

The IBF is much nicer looking.

It generally gets more respect as well.

Not many people seem to respect the WBO very much.

[dde91]

so far the IBF belt looks better and is better respected by the people.

Looks like the WBO is getting Wiped out.