Ring belt worthy?

Printable View

07-24-2008, 02:59 PM
killersheep

Ring belt worthy?

So I understand the argument that the ring title should be held by a fight between the #1 and #2 ranked guys in a division. What happens in the case when the #1 has already beaten the #2 guy?

This is the case at HW with WLAD over Sam Peter and at WW with Cotto over Mosley. Do the have to fight those guys again to win the Ring title?
07-24-2008, 03:03 PM
donnydarkoIRL

Re: Ring belt worthy?

In the Ring it states that in certain situation No.1 vs. No.3 will suffice in crowning the No.1 guy.

I believe this is that situation.
07-24-2008, 03:07 PM
killersheep

Re: Ring belt worthy?

Quote:

Originally Posted by hitmandonny

In the Ring it states that in certain situation No.1 vs. No.3 will suffice in crowning the No.1 guy.

I believe this is that situation.

So Wlad would have to beat Chagaev and Cotto would have to beat Williams?
07-24-2008, 04:11 PM
Lance Uppercut

Re: Ring belt worthy?

Yes, even though Wlad already beat Peter, he would have to beat him again. The reason being that Wlad beat Peter when Peter was a prospect, now Wlad who is the #1 ranked fighter in the world would have to fight Peter who is now #2 in the world to fill the vacancy.

Also the #1 fighter fighting the #3 fighter can fill a vacancy when there is little difference between the quality of the #3 fighter and #2 fighter.
07-24-2008, 05:09 PM
bzkfn

Re: Ring belt worthy?

Quote:

Originally Posted by killersheep

So I understand the argument that the ring title should be held by a fight between the #1 and #2 ranked guys in a division. What happens in the case when the #1 has already beaten the #2 guy?

This is the case at HW with WLAD over Sam Peter and at WW with Cotto over Mosley. Do the have to fight those guys again to win the Ring title?

IMO I feel Cotto-Margo should be for the ring title. How the hell is Mosley ranked #2 at Welter anyways? Or is this because Golden Boy own it?

However, I would argue that is is necessary for Wlad to fight Peter again anyways. If Sam beats Vitali, he won't have much of a choice will he?
07-24-2008, 06:36 PM
Lance Uppercut

Re: Ring belt worthy?

Quote:

Originally Posted by bzkfn

Quote:

Originally Posted by killersheep

So I understand the argument that the ring title should be held by a fight between the #1 and #2 ranked guys in a division. What happens in the case when the #1 has already beaten the #2 guy?

This is the case at HW with WLAD over Sam Peter and at WW with Cotto over Mosley. Do the have to fight those guys again to win the Ring title?

IMO I feel Cotto-Margo should be for the ring title. How the hell is Mosley ranked #2 at Welter anyways? Or is this because Golden Boy own it?

However, I would argue that is is necessary for Wlad to fight Peter again anyways. If Sam beats Vitali, he won't have much of a choice will he?

I think Mosely deserves #2. His razor thin loss to Cotto and and his complete domination of Collazo are better then Margarita's loss to Williams and KO Cintron
07-24-2008, 08:18 PM
Preme

Re: Ring belt worthy?

Wlad beat peter along time ago, i doubt he would beat him now.
07-25-2008, 08:29 AM
donnydarkoIRL

Re: Ring belt worthy?

Quote:

Originally Posted by killersheep

Quote:

Originally Posted by hitmandonny

In the Ring it states that in certain situation No.1 vs. No.3 will suffice in crowning the No.1 guy.

I believe this is that situation.

So Wlad would have to beat Chagaev and Cotto would have to beat Williams?

Hmm...I just consulted the rankings I thought Mrgarito was at No.3.
I think If Cotto wins he should be elevated, if Margarito wins he needs to reinforce it with one win.

As for the heavies.
Yeah I feel Wlad needs to beat either Chagaev or Peter again.