WBO belt is respected in low divisions only

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • famicommander
    Banned
    Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
    • May 2018
    • 10628
    • 5,781
    • 1
    • 49,546

    #21
    Originally posted by _Rexy_
    I like the WBO because it allows fighters to move up and immediately challenge the champ at the higher weight. Really allows guys to be as great as they want.
    That sounds good in theory, but in practice that's how you end up with Andrade vs Walter Kautondokwa for a vacant belt or Amanda Serrano vs some jazzercise class lady for several vacant belts which she then vacated herself without defending.

    Comment

    • Cobra Curry
      Undisputed Champion
      Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
      • Dec 2017
      • 1344
      • 111
      • 350
      • 34,979

      #22
      Originally posted by sicko
      WBC, WBA, IBF............................WBO

      WBO is the youngest and wasn't fully Recognized until 2004 so yeah really don't care too much about the WBO and that is no disrespect to the Current fighter who hold them but it is a young belt and just doesn't have the same "prestige" as the other 3
      I was of this opinion until Naseem Hamed showed up.

      Comment

      • joe strong
        Average Joe
        Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
        • Jan 2009
        • 17982
        • 1,813
        • 869
        • 58,015

        #23
        Originally posted by JakeTheBoxer
        It has been respected at 147 for a long time. Many people believe Crawford is the best welterweight. In the past some great warriors held that title ( Margarito, Cotto, Williams, Pacquiao, Bradley) .

        That belt also has some respect in divisions under 147.

        154 champ Teixeira? Nobody cares.

        160 champ Andrade? Nobody cares.

        168 champ Saunders? Nobody cares..

        WBO heavyweight title was never important, many guys vacated it to challenge for other belts...

        It is what it is, WBO has some respect at welterweight and divisions under..
        Sanders, Mercer, Moorer & a cou[ple others I believe vacated it because it was just a stepping stone belt. The WBO created their belt when Mike Tyson was the undisputed champion. Francesco Damiani & Johnny DuPlooy fought for the vacant title while Tyson was king. It has always been a secondary belt. They have titles in regions that lack depth like the WBO Africa title & the Asian Pacific & Oriental titles which give fighters top 15 rankings. I remember years ago people thought I was a fool when Alex Leapai beat some scrub for the WBO asian pacific/oriental titles & I said he was one win away from a title shot at Klitschko. Nobody on this site thought it would happen then he fought Boytsov in a final eliminator & beat him. The WBO has always been a joke with it rankings because of all the foolish regional belts it has. Frank Warren is in bed with them just like Don King used to be with the WBA.

        Comment

        • Toffee
          Undisputed Champion
          Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
          • Oct 2018
          • 7353
          • 2,545
          • 74
          • 62,824

          #24
          None of them mean anything unless they make fights happen.

          We know who the best fighters are in a division. We don't need rankings.

          Belts have two merits - making mandatories and enforcing a standard on voluntary defences. And they hardly ever get those right.

          And they typically get in the way of the biggest fights.

          It's the fighter, not the belt. But fighters and promoters are still playing the belt game.

          Comment

          Working...
          TOP