This reminds me of when Shane Mosley fought Adrian Stone and Larry Merchant called him out about the weak level of competition. Shane Mosley defended the selection by saying that Stone was the former IBO champ, which Merchant said something sarcastically along the lines of "IBO? Oh Wow!"
Anyone who says the IBO isn't a 'real' world title....
Collapse
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
The WBC, WBA, IBF and WBO all recognize each other, and only each other, as the world championships of the sport. Personally, I have a hard time recognizing the WBO and wish the WBC, WBA and IBF had never let the WBO join the party. Since the WBO gained recognition, undisputed champions have become a thing of the past. Guys don't even bother trying.
Before the WBO gained recognition, it was very common to have 2-3 undisputed WBC/WBA/IBF champions at any given time, with fighters frequently attempting to unify the titles. It gave context to every division and if the division didn't have an undisputed champion, chances were that before long someone would make a legitimate attempt to gain that status.
The IBO is completely irrelevant and it's a black eye on this website that the IBO is given recognized status as a world championship in exchange for advertising on this website.Comment
-
I don't see the logic of this belt hierarchy. The WBA rankings are an absolute joke. Worse than the WBO's. What you're talking bout is the proliferation of belts, i.e. the more there are the worse it is. But once the belts are established they are no worse than any of the rest. To run down the WBO belts gives the other three credit they don't deserve.The WBC, WBA, IBF and WBO all recognize each other, and only each other, as the world championships of the sport. Personally, I have a hard time recognizing the WBO and wish the WBC, WBA and IBF had never let the WBO join the party. Since the WBO gained recognition, undisputed champions have become a thing of the past. Guys don't even bother trying.
Before the WBO gained recognition, it was very common to have 2-3 undisputed WBC/WBA/IBF champions at any given time, with fighters frequently attempting to unify the titles. It gave context to every division and if the division didn't have an undisputed champion, chances were that before long someone would make a legitimate attempt to gain that status.
The IBO is completely irrelevant and it's a black eye on this website that the IBO is given recognized status as a world championship in exchange for advertising on this website.Comment
-
Comment
-
Anyway the belts all don't mean schit to me. I am far more concerned with how you got the belt than which belt it is or which organization it is. Beating a quality fighter is more important than collecting trinkets.Comment
-
I remember looking at the lightweight titlists when Linares (WBC), Crolla (WBA), Barthelemy (IBF), and Flanagan (WBO) had the belts.
Between all four of them, they had beaten a sum total of 0 top 10 opponents to get the belts. Zero! To argue that any one of those titles had more significance than another is just silly. They were all meaningless.Comment
-

He's sure as hell doubled down on this idea that the IBO counts for something.
He's fighting a guy who went 10-1 against bottom-tier opposition then stopped super duper faded Daniel Geale (I was thinking of betting on Quinlan to win that fight as part of a parlay, but not because I knew anything about who the **** he was).
This fight sucks ass.Last edited by BrometheusBob.; 12-15-2016, 04:57 AM.Comment
-


Comment