Where do you guys rate the IBO belt?

[boxingp4p]

I know we are all sick of the countless ABC belts and wish there could be one champ per division but as that may well be a long time away i was wondering where you guys rate the IBO belt in the grand scheme of things. The IBO has been seen in better standing these days due to the champions holding the belts i.e. Hatton , Pacquiao , Klitschko .

The computerised ranking system is also a step up from the questionable rankings of the "big four" bodies but i have also seen some questionable fighters holding the belt and passing themselves off as "world champions" . Personally i think its on the same level or slight step up from a european title but not as big in importance as the WBC , IBF , WBA , WBO etc.

[Peek_A_Boo]

wtf is IBO belt>??

Didnt even know it existed!!!!!

Na but seriously there should be IBO belt no point all you need is 3

Actually all you need is 1. Fk with al these belts floadting arounf EVERYONES a fkin world chamion!!!!!!

[PittyPat]

Sure, I rate it. All the best have held that belt and laid claim to being undisputed champ on its merit, so why not consider it legit?

[BattlingNelson]

They have the best rankings.

Still we don't need another alphabet bastard and their champions is weaker than the 4 'premier' governing bodies.

[MANGLER]

I don't. We already got 4 belts aside from the main one. It seems on the verge of becomin the 5th major belt tho.

[PittyPat]

their champions is weaker than the 4 'premier' governing bodies.

How so? All the best fighters of the past 15 years have held the IBO title, in many divisions. Some wouldn't even be called undisputed champion had they not held it at some point.

[BattlingNelson]

How so? All the best fighters of the past 15 years have held the IBO title, in many divisions. Some wouldn't even be called undisputed champion had they not held it at some point.

If you check some independent rankings and list the champions of the governing bodies, you'll find that the IBO champs generally have the lowest ranked champions.

As for undisputed, the general consensus is that undisputed means that you simultaneously are recognized as champion by WBA, WBC, IBF and WBO. The IBO does not (thankfully) enter this equation and it's complicated enough as it is. Mike Tyson is still the only undisputed champion who has won the major belts in seperate fights.

[PittyPat]

If you check some independent rankings and list the champions of the governing bodies, you'll find that the IBO champs generally have the lowest ranked champions.

What?

I'll say it again, the IBO belt has been held by nearly every living great/top fighter within the past 15 years. Pacquiao, Jones Jr., Hopkins, Lennox, Wladimir, Hatton, JM Marquez, and many others. Rankings aside, does that list not say something about the quality and name value of their champions?

As for undisputed, the general consensus is that undisputed means that you simultaneously are recognized as champion by WBA, WBC, IBF and WBO. The IBO does not (thankfully) enter this equation and it's complicated enough as it is. Mike Tyson is still the only undisputed champion who has won the major belts in seperate fights.

As much as I often would prefer not to acknowledge any of the alphabet titles whatsoever, I disagree with that logic completely. It's absurd. As far as I'm concerned, Wlad is the undisputed HW champ based on his current ownership of the WBO, IBF, IBO and The Ring titles. The other 2 belts are held by his brother and a gigantic soon-to-be jailbird who can't box for ****. Thus, how could he possibly not be the undisputed champion?

The same goes for Lennox, after he dropped the WBA belt. He simultaneously held the WBC, IBF and IBO belts, and was considered during that time to be the undisputed champion.

[BattlingNelson]

What?

I'll say it again, the IBO belt has been held by nearly every living great/top fighter within the past 15 years. Pacquiao, Jones Jr., Hopkins, Lennox, Wladimir, Hatton, JM Marquez, and many others. Rankings aside, does that list not say something about the quality and name value of their champions?



As much as I often would prefer not to acknowledge any of the alphabet titles whatsoever, I disagree with that logic completely. It's absurd. As far as I'm concerned, Wlad is the undisputed HW champ based on his current ownership of the WBO, IBF, IBO and The Ring titles. The other 2 belts are held by his brother and a gigantic soon-to-be jailbird who can't box for ****. Thus, how could he possibly not be the undisputed champion?

The same goes for Lennox, after he dropped the WBA belt. He simultaneously held the WBC, IBF and IBO belts, and was considered during that time to be the undisputed champion.

Check the rankings and you'll surely find that IBO is the weakest of the bastards.


I think you'll find yourself in a very tiny minority with your last paragraph.

[PittyPat]

Check the rankings and you'll surely find that IBO is the weakest of the bastards.

OK, you're going to have to point me in the direction of these rankings of which you speak and take so much stock. All I know is that many good names have held that belt in multiple divisions and fought good opposition in defence of it (or their other belts).

I think you'll find yourself in a very tiny minority with your last paragraph.

How so?