The Ring is considering Bradley vs Alexander for the Ring title

[jrosales13]

So in your opinion a guy who lost his last fight deserves to fight for the vacant Ring Belt. Ok....cool.

If it is a box off between #1 vs #2 or #1 vs #3(their rules) yes.

Why wouldn't I be?

And, again we can say he lost all we want but technically he won. You can't really go with moral victories. But, whatever man...Act like if The Ring is breaking their rules or making up ones the fly like you did with your Ward and AA comparison.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

If it is a box off between #1 vs #2 or #1 vs #3(their rules) yes.

Why wouldn't I be?

And, again we can say he lost all we want but technically he won. You can't really go with moral victories. But, whatever man...Act like if The Ring is breaking their rules or making up ones the fly like you did with your Ward and AA comparison.

I dont give two ***s about their rules. Im asking if its right or wrong. I thought this was a boxing forum where you express your opinions?

Instead of saying "Welll....uhhh durr....if Ring says its ok... durrrr.... i guess its ok....hurr durrr"

[Steelhammer2011]

What an absolute joke.

Who has Bradley beat?

Alexander the fraud was schooled, outclassed, dominated and humiliated by Kotelnik in front of his hometown fans.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

"Alexander clearly lost his last fight but....uhhh hurr durrr....the judges gave him a gift so....uhh durrr....i guess he won....hurr durrr derp"

[Dirk Diggler UK]

What an absolute joke.

Who has Bradley beat?

Alexander the fraud was schooled, outclassed, dominated and humiliated by Kotelnik in front of his hometown fans.

Steelhammer killing this thread with cold, hard, steel facts.

[jrosales13]

I dont give two ***s about their rules. Im asking if its right or wrong. I thought this was a boxing forum where you express your opinions?

Instead of saying "Welll....uhhh durr....if Ring says its ok... durrrr.... i guess its ok....hurr durrr"

I thought I gave my opinion. The difference is that you hold the ring to a higher standard than I do..."Durr, hurr, durr I guess because the ring is called the bible of boxing i should see it as the end all and be all of boxing titles hurr durrr"

So ******.

Again I hold the lineal title in the highest regard. Not the ring. My opinion the winner is not the lineal champ. Khan vs the winner would be for the lineal title. I thought I made that clear.

And, yes there is no problem with what the ring is actually doing. They have done this before like with Vitaly-Sanders. The winner was not considered the lineal champ but it was for the ring title.

If Alexander was ranked #4 then yes it would be wrong and have a problem.

But, apparently durrrrr hurrrrr you don't see the difference. There is nothing to argue here. Stop holding the ring too such a high regard.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

I thought I gave my opinion. The difference is that you hold the ring to a higher standard than I do..."Durr, hurr, durr I guess because the ring is called the bible of boxing i should see it as the end all and be all of boxing titles hurr durrr"

So ******.

Again I hold the lineal title in the highest regard. Not the ring. My opinion the winner is not the lineal champ. Khan vs the winner would be for the lineal title. I thought I made that clear.

And, yes there is no problem with what the ring is actually doing. They have done this before like with Vitaly-Sanders. The winner was not considered the lineal champ but it was for the ring title.

If Alexander was ranked #4 then yes it would be wrong and have a problem.

But, apparently durrrrr hurrrrr you don't see the difference. There is nothing to argue here. Stop holding the ring too such a high regard.

Sanders knocked Wlad the *** out. So he was entitled to fight for it.

I dont hold it in that high a regard anymore. I think its ****** that they can officially score Alexander losing his last fight yet still rank him that high and suggest he should fight for their belt. I think their p4p rankings are a joke. I think Oscar owning it is a joke. So wtf you talkin bout?

However, the belt should hold some prestige. Im just striving for whats right. It would just further make a mockery of the title if they dished it out. We already have enough pointless belts.

You're basically saying its ok because they say its ok.

[RINGG]

Bradley first went to the UK and won the WBC by beating Witter and then won the WBO title by beating Holt. Alexander now has the WBC and IBF titles. It's not so unimaginable this bout is for the Ring title. It's either leading to a big money fight at welterweight or an unification with Khan, either way we would benefit.

[Ko King 212]

Bradley first went to the UK and won the WBC by beating Witter and then won the WBO title by beating Holt. Alexander now has the WBC and IBF titles. It's not so unimaginable this bout is for the Ring title. It's either leading to a big money fight at welterweight or an unification with Khan, either way we would benefit.

And there you have it.

I don't understand why dazed and j ro went back forth with dude. The problem is he thought Alexander lost. Alexander is still undefeated and is the num 3 rank fighter at 140. Whether you think he lost or not doesn't matter.

[IMDAZED]

This thread is debating whether its right or wrong for the Ring Belt to be up for grabs. You, like damn near everyone else, thought Alexander lost his last fight. So should he contest the vacant title in his next match? Im asking your opinion. I dont give a *** about what Rings rules may or may not be. Is it right ?

The rules allowed Pac to fight for a title at 154, did that make it right?

If you don't give a **** about the Ring or its rules, why are you asking me when Hopkins got the Ring belt?