The belt is vacant, there is no mandatory, and the #1 is gonna be fighting for another belt. Also, the WBC belt has been in the tournament since its inception, and having two members of the tournament who happen to be next in line after the #1 fight for it makes perfect sense to me.
LOL. Froch/Abraham for Vacant WBC belt now
Collapse
-
Comment
-
-
So... it makes no sense. Gotcha.The belt is vacant, there is no mandatory, and the #1 is gonna be fighting for another belt. Also, the WBC belt has been in the tournament since its inception, and having two members of the tournament who happen to be next in line after the #1 fight for it makes perfect sense to me.Comment
-
His logic eludes me too. It's obvious that their #1 fighting Ward (who is universally ranked #1 by the independent rankings) should be for both belts in any non-corrupt universe. And then the Abraham-Froch winner would fight the unified champion for both belts after that.
Still I suppose it will all end up the same eventually so it doesn't matter that much. But it's still bullshit.Comment
-
Comment
-
Good news!
This is the way it should have been in the first place, and it makes the Froch-Abraham fight more interesting and meaningful.
Never before could someone who already had the WBA belt fight for a vacant WBC world title. It makes a lot more sense for the winner of Froch-Abraham to be the WBC champion. The titles will be unified in the Super Six final anyway.Comment
-
We all know what you meant.Comment
Comment