Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comments Thread For: Verdejo-Vasquez For WBA "Gold" Title on Crawford-Khan Card

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    For the love of god, the WBA really is the worst

    Comment


    • #12
      Should be a good fight.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by BigZ44 View Post
        For the love of god, the WBA really is the worst
        The moment they introduced the super title in 2001, everybody should have immediately ceased recognizing the WBA.

        And for those wise enough to have never began recognizing the WBO, that leaves only two titles instead of four.

        When you only recognize the IBF and WBC, boxing is much easier to follow.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by Slyboots View Post
          Can someone tell me what in the **** the gold title is
          An extra trinket that boxing doesn't need. It's to determine the mandatory to the regular champion, who is then mandatory to the "super" champion every 16 months, lol.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by Scipio2009 View Post
            An extra trinket that boxing doesn't need. It's to determine the mandatory to the regular champion, who is then mandatory to the "super" champion every 16 months, lol.
            they shouldn’t sanction Verdejo Vazquez or Easter vs Barthelemy as title fights. Jus call them both eliminators. Then those two winners fight for the right to be Lomas next mandatory instead of these fake titles.

            Comment


            • #16
              From the WBA's perspective, why not keep adding titles? They get a % of the purse for each one. Until the WBA "super" title becomes devalued by these shenanigans, there will be no consequences.

              Comment


              • #17
                It would be interesting if there was a monthly or quarterly ranking of sanctioning bodies by media members. One thing that might motivate the WBA to change would be the threat of dropping below the IBO to 5th. The main problem with that approach is that it would do more to validate the IBO than to devalue the WBC.
                1. IBF
                2-3. WBC or WBO
                4. WBA
                5. IBO

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by WBC WBA IBF View Post
                  The moment they introduced the super title in 2001, everybody should have immediately ceased recognizing the WBA.

                  And for those wise enough to have never began recognizing the WBO, that leaves only two titles instead of four.

                  When you only recognize the IBF and WBC, boxing is much easier to follow.
                  The WBC makes a new belt every weekend for a fight. They're as ridiculous as the WBA.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by WBC WBA IBF View Post
                    Have been trying for months for the WBA to explain the gold title to me, but they refuse.

                    When I talk to PBC about it, they insist they don't know what it is and that I need to talk to the WBA.
                    "It's that nutjob from the forum on the phone again. What shall we tell him?"

                    "Tell him to talk to the WBA about it."

                    "But we are the WBA."

                    "Ok then tell him to talk to PBC instead."
                    Last edited by jglvz256; 02-28-2019, 08:52 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Lol, this is becoming a disease.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP