WBA, WBC, IBF, IBO, WBO....Which Belt is Most Credible??

[Shadows]

Ring belt is more credible than those 5...

Lineal>Ring>IBO>the 4 major....

Jro, do you really consider the IBO a major belt, or are you joking around?

[-Mustang-]

ring belt followed by wbc ... i dunno why you didn't add the ring belt to the poll

[jrosales13]

so why doesn't Baldomir get the credit he deserves if The Ring belt is more credible than the major 4??? people claiming that Margarito was better than baldomir but Baldomir was the Ring Champion

I can not speak for anybody else... But, I considered Baldomir the Ring/lineal champ. He beat the man, who beat the man, who beat the man... But, the Margarito argument is cuz in reality even though Baldomir was the man. Margarito was the better fighter, the more dangerous fighter... Anything Baldomir could do Margarito could do it better. Any advantage Baldomir had Margarito had more of it... That is where that argument comes from... But, I and everybody else should recognize Baldomir as the ring/lineal champ...

Is also kind of the argument like I had with Reed... When Roy Jones went up to 168 he fought the best fighter of that weight-class. James Toney was the best fighter but the lineal champ was Benn/Liles/Little during that year. Toney was better than those 3. But, those in 1994 were the lineal champs. So they were considered the man over Toney in that year. But, Toney was considered the better fighter...

[jrosales13]

Jro, do you really consider the IBO a major belt, or are you joking around?

I know is not a major belt.. But, I like it more then the other belts in the sense that. They have other title holders in there rankings... Is like the WBC will not have the WBC champ in there rankings and I think that is BS... The IBO has the WBC champ, WBC champ, etc, etc in there rankings... Which IMO is the way it should be... There are some policies that the IBO has that I like more so than the major 4... But, I don't consider the IBO as a major best just yet. But, I think in 10yrs it will be in line with the other 4... Hopefully it keeps there policies...

[Shadows]

I know is not a major belt.. But, I like it more then the other belts in the sense that. They have other title holders in there rankings... Is like the WBC will not have the WBC champ in there rankings and I think that is BS... The IBO has the WBC champ, WBC champ, etc, etc in there rankings... Which IMO is the way it should be... There are some policies that the IBO has that I like more so than the major 4... But, I don't consider the IBO as a major best just yet. But, I think in 10yrs it will be in line with the other 4... Hopefully it keeps there policies...

Oh, okay. I got ya.

I see what you're saying about their rankings, but I don't like the idea of another belt.

[jrosales13]

i hope all you guys are joking..IBO?! that no name ass belt wtf

It really goes WBC,IBF,WBA,WBO. everything else is irrelevant

the ring magazine belt is ****** too.

only reason i see IBO up there is cus Manny had it and that tells me you know nothing about the IBO or their champions...IBO gets ****ted on by everyone else...so does WBO

Really? I thought it was more cuz of Lennox Lewis... You did know Lewis as a protest only fought for the IBO right? Maybe you should stop focusing so much on your hatred of Pac bro...

[TheStoneRoses]

I can not speak for anybody else... But, I considered Baldomir the Ring/lineal champ. He beat the man, who beat the man, who beat the man... But, the Margarito argument is cuz in reality even though Baldomir was the man. Margarito was the better fighter, the more dangerous fighter... Anything Baldomir could do Margarito could do it better. Any advantage Baldomir had Margarito had more of it... That is where that argument comes from... But, I and everybody else should recognize Baldomir as the ring/lineal champ...

Is also kind of the argument like I had with Reed... When Roy Jones went up to 168 he fought the best fighter of that weight-class. James Toney was the best fighter but the lineal champ was Benn/Liles/Little during that year. Toney was better than those 3. But, those in 1994 were the lineal champs. So they were considered the man over Toney in that year. But, Toney was considered the better fighter...

so basically you are demeaning the Ring Belt?.....this is all objective....you can say Margarito was better than Baldomir, you can say Zab Judah was better than baldomir, but Baldomir was the ****ing Champ.....if you are a boxer right, and you want to be recognised as the best in your division, you go after the Ring Champ, not the guy who people think may be better than the Ring Champ

[jrosales13]

Oh, okay. I got ya.

I see what you're saying about their rankings, but I don't like the idea of another belt.

I really don't like it either... I prefer only 1 belt per weight-class. I like the old school ways... But, I honestly believe in 10yrs the IBO is going to be consider with the major 4... It sucks but I think is going to happen... Is like when the WBO started nobody cared about it but it grew momentum....

[-The Glove-]

I want to know your thoughts........i really wish that one day we get back to having 1 champ for every division like it used to be because its far too easy for boxers to become champs these days and its unfair to fighters of the past who had to fight the 1 real champ in a divison to be recognised as the best

I agree. Boxing needs to follow the UFC's model and have just one champ.

[Shadows]

I really don't like it either... I prefer only 1 belt per weight-class. I like the old school ways... But, I honestly believe in 10yrs the IBO is going to be consider with the major 4... It sucks but I think is going to happen... Is like when the WBO started nobody cared about it but it grew momentum....

Yeah, one belt would be ideal, but I'm not holding my breath.

Hell, I'd be happy if it were like 60's, 70's, etc. or Japan, where only the WBC and WBA (or any two sanctioning bodies) were/are recognized.