Comments Thread For: IBF to Decide Whether Joshua-Dubois Will Be a Championship Fight

[Boxingfanatic75]

There can only be one champion. That's what the word means. If you have two champions you have zero champions.

There's one champion per division and everyone else has a fake ass trinket.

This is why boxing is a laughingstock of all sports. UFC figured it out long ago; one champion per division. Boxing is the only major sport with participation trophies and those defending them believes “everyone is a winner” on the playground.

[joe strong]

Now that Ol’ Fish Eyes has control of the IBF mandatory there should be no issues with the Fury/Usyk rematch having all the belts on the line again. The winner of Joshua/Dubois is next in line.

[famicommander]

There are champions all over the place. Divisions, geographies, organisations, interim, silver, regular, super.

Only one can be the best. Usyk is, without debate, the best. But that doesn't mean he gets to monopolise all the trinkets. And we are just taking about trinkets. But they are what keeps the rest of the division moving.

This is why Undisputed is significant. It is significant precisely because it is rare. You don't get to just claim it. To maintain champion status you have to face the organisation's number one contender. And when you've unified belts you have to keep on doing it.

Usyk isn't even being given an opportunity to face the mandatory challenger. He had to sign a two-fight deal to get his shot at Fury. And now you're arguing that the IBF should strip him for honoring that deal so they can give his belt to the winner of a fight between a guy he knocked out with a jab and another guy he beat twice over 24 rounds.

Once again, any organization that does this doesn't deserve to exist. Their rules aren't worth preserving if this is the result and everyone who works for the IBF should resign in shame and apologize to the sport at large.

[Toffee]

There can only be one champion. That's what the word means. If you have two champions you have zero champions.

There's one champion per division and everyone else has a fake ass trinket.

There are champions all over the place. Divisions, geographies, organisations, interim, silver, regular, super.

Only one can be the best. Usyk is, without debate, the best. But that doesn't mean he gets to monopolise all the trinkets. And we are just taking about trinkets. But they are what keeps the rest of the division moving.

This is why Undisputed is significant. It is significant precisely because it is rare. You don't get to just claim it. To maintain champion status you have to face the organisation's number one contender. And when you've unified belts you have to keep on doing it.

[famicommander]

If you had your way we'd be down to 2 boxers in the division and nothing coming up behind them.

Being a Champion doesn't mean anyone is saying they're the best. It means they're that organisation's belt holder.

I don't exactly like the multi org setup, nor a lot of the decisions they make, but there's a reason that they continue. Under your system you'd eliminate most of the fighters early with no way back.

There can only be one champion. That's what the word means. If you have two champions you have zero champions.

There's one champion per division and everyone else has a fake ass trinket.

[famicommander]

This isn't WWF wrestling, there's no "lose this fight and you never get another title shot stipulations"

If a fighter gets themselves into a mandatory spot and the champion can't fulfil the mandatory obligations for any reason they should be stripped its that simple.

Not if the fighter doesn't actually deserve to be in a mandatory spot. If the organization picks a fighter who sucks to be a mandatory challenger, the organization should simply stop existing.

Hrgovic never deserved to be a mandatory challenger to begin with and Dubois beating him doesn't mean he's worthy either. We already saw he wasn't when Usyk knocked him out on a jab.

Hrgovic's only good "win" should've been a loss. He has never legitimately beaten any heavyweight with a pulse. Dubois beating him and Jarrell Miller is absolutely meaningless as it pertains to deserving a shot at Usyk.

[Toffee]

What does it matter if the division keeps moving if you're awarding a farcical title to someone who doesn't deserve it?

Dubois had his shot at Usyk and he got knocked out on a jab.
Joshua had two shots at Usyk and lost twice.

There is no rational argument for taking the championship from Usyk and awarding it to the winner of Joshua vs Dubois. Usyk has already proven himself to be better than both of them in the ring.

If the IBF strips the undisputed champion to award it to a battle of his leftovers, the IBF should just cease to exist because they provide zero value to the world.

The reason you crown a champion is to reward the man who has proven he is the best fighter on the planet in his weight class. It's not supposed to be about collecting sanctioning fees, getting promoters and fighters paid, or filling a vacancy.

Anyone who seriously tries to argue that Dubois or Joshua are more deserving being called a champion than Usyk is legitimately insane.

If you had your way we'd be down to 2 boxers in the division and nothing coming up behind them.

Being a Champion doesn't mean anyone is saying they're the best. It means they're that organisation's belt holder.

I don't exactly like the multi org setup, nor a lot of the decisions they make, but there's a reason that they continue. Under your system you'd eliminate most of the fighters early with no way back.

[Atypicalbrit]

Again, Usyk already beat both possible IBF contenders. One of them by KO on a jab, one of them twice by 12 round decision.

The IBF has no right to exist if they strip Usyk. If their rules ended up with a circumstance where you have to strip an undisputed champion to give his belt to one of two guys he already beat a total of three times, their organization is absolutely worthless and they should all be fired.

This isn't WWF wrestling, there's no "lose this fight and you never get another title shot stipulations"

If a fighter gets themselves into a mandatory spot and the champion can't fulfil the mandatory obligations for any reason they should be stripped its that simple.

[famicommander]

Yeah that's not how things work.

Usyk is clearly the best in the division so should we just now give him no mandatories unless someone comes along who the general public think could beat him then make him the mandatory.

Theres rules to follow here and they need to be applied even handedly and not to favour certain fighters or certain situations. The IBF hasn't been defended against a mandatory in YEARS.

Again, Usyk already beat both possible IBF contenders. One of them by KO on a jab, one of them twice by 12 round decision.

The IBF has no right to exist if they strip Usyk. If their rules ended up with a circumstance where you have to strip an undisputed champion to give his belt to one of two guys he already beat a total of three times, their organization is absolutely worthless and they should all be fired.

[Atypicalbrit]

What does it matter if the division keeps moving if you're awarding a farcical title to someone who doesn't deserve it?

Dubois had his shot at Usyk and he got knocked out on a jab.
Joshua had two shots at Usyk and lost twice.

There is no rational argument for taking the championship from Usyk and awarding it to the winner of Joshua vs Dubois. Usyk has already proven himself to be better than both of them in the ring.

If the IBF strips the undisputed champion to award it to a battle of his leftovers, the IBF should just cease to exist because they provide zero value to the world.

The reason you crown a champion is to reward the man who has proven he is the best fighter on the planet in his weight class. It's not supposed to be about collecting sanctioning fees, getting promoters and fighters paid, or filling a vacancy.

Anyone who seriously tries to argue that Dubois or Joshua are more deserving being called a champion than Usyk is legitimately insane.

Yeah that's not how things work.

Usyk is clearly the best in the division so should we just now give him no mandatories unless someone comes along who the general public think could beat him then make him the mandatory.

Theres rules to follow here and they need to be applied even handedly and not to favour certain fighters or certain situations. The IBF hasn't been defended against a mandatory in YEARS.