What ever happened to rankings and mandatory foes???

[extracurRICular]

What ever happened to rankings and mandatory foes???

I mean seriously.......seems every one just picks the fights they want and the fights they don't want....did I miss something here? last time I checked the rankings were still there...the sanctioning bodies were still there (unfortunately).......and the mandatory rules have not changed....but yet it's a katdamn free for all out there.......what gives??? Yes I know MONEY drives the sport but then what is the point of keeping up the farce that is a sanctioning body?

[Russian Crushin]

Rankings are bullsh-t. just Look at any ABC ranking

[Weebler I]

The IBF are possibly the best at enforcing their mandatories.

Hopkins v Murat
Froch v Groves
Smith v Molina
Alexander v Brook (postponed)

Not sure about the lower weights as I don't follow them as closely but they still do enforce mandatories.

[bigcursedawg]

If its a big money fight they will always look the other way and not enforce the mandatory because they will get more money from the sanctioning fees.

All the ABC rankings all bull**** too. Khan and Dulorme were both #1 at 147 according to the WBC. It's makes no sense.

The transnational boxing ranks are the best rankings IMO. These rankings are by far the most fair, but unfortunately they have no influence or bearing on making fights.

[extracurRICular]

the tale is def waging the dog in boxing.....Top Rank and GBP have more say on what fights go on or don't go on than the people sanctioning these trinket belts.....as much as it pisses me off to see how corrupt this sport I love is...it gives me hope that one day all the alphabet soups will go away and there will be one "league" for boxing National Boxing Leauge (NBL) has a good sound to me.....

[big_james10]

What ever happened to rankings and mandatory foes???

I mean seriously.......seems every one just picks the fights they want and the fights they don't want....did I miss something here? last time I checked the rankings were still there...the sanctioning bodies were still there (unfortunately).......and the mandatory rules have not changed....but yet it's a katdamn free for all out there.......what gives??? Yes I know MONEY drives the sport but then what is the point of keeping up the farce that is a sanctioning body?

Rankings and mandatories have been replaced by interim champions, interim-interim champions, diamond champions, champion emeritus' and super champions

[extracurRICular]

Rankings and mandatories have been replaced by interim champions, interim-interim champions, diamond champions, champion emeritus' and super champions

waiting on the first ....Champion's Champion............

[yuppie]

It's true but watch a champ suddenly take his mandatory over a live threat and use the excuse of "he's the mandatory doe".

[sugarsmosley]

Too many champions now... 4 "legit" champs is enough. Mandatory foes are fine, even though most don't fight them, as winning the belt already makes them a "world champion" and vacating doesn't change that. It gets really confusing with the interim, silver, diamond, super, and now "champion of the decade".

Oh yeah, and fighters should be stripped if they don't defend their title within a year.

[techliam]

The IBF are possibly the best at enforcing their mandatories.

Hopkins v Murat
Froch v Groves
Smith v Molina
Alexander v Brook (postponed)

Not sure about the lower weights as I don't follow them as closely but they still do enforce mandatories.

I think so too. The IBF also have ONE champion/belt per division, and hardly ever use interim Championships. The IBF however, do not work well with the WBC when it comes to Unification fights, though I really find it hard to place the blame on the IBF here. It's not to say they don't have their own problems, but they are by far the best of the bunch.