the champion was stripped for agreeing to a voluntary defense even though the mandatory was already OVERDUE before the previous title fight. there was no choice but to strip the champion. the champion was refusing to face an overdue mandatory. it would have been far more lucrative for the IBF to break their rules, but they didn't. they acted ethically, despite it costing them quite a bit of money. i respect that and support that.
it doesn't matter who ended up fighting for the vacant title. the rules call for the two highest ranked available contenders, which happened to be glazkov and martin. you not liking glazkov and martin is not a justification for ignoring the rules.
you continue to refuse to tell us which IBF rule you disagree with and what you think the rule should be instead.
it doesn't matter who ended up fighting for the vacant title. the rules call for the two highest ranked available contenders, which happened to be glazkov and martin. you not liking glazkov and martin is not a justification for ignoring the rules.
you continue to refuse to tell us which IBF rule you disagree with and what you think the rule should be instead.
Comment