Should "Saddoboxing" recognise The Ring champions as the real world champs?

The thing that really pisses me off about modern day boxing is all the so called world champions and all the governing bodys.They make and break the rules to suit them selfs and the promoters that slip them a few quid here and there.
For example Zab Judah lost his last fight but acourding to the IBF he is still the world champ.Also the WBA stripped Lennox Lewis coz he would not fight John "hugger" Ruiz.

All these so call champs just confuses people and the press so then they dont bother with boxing.

The Ring started there own Chamionship policy a few years ago and a lot of people that count have taken notice such as HBO and a lot of American boxing experts.
The only way you can win or loses The Ring belt is in the ring like in the good old days.Nobody gets stripped coz they wont fight some undeserving number 1 contender or pay a sanctning fee.

I know a lot of people on this site dont agree but I think the more people that recognise The Ring belt the better and the more legitamte it will become.


I think for the good of boxing, Saddoboxing should take a lead and just ignore the paper titles sach as wbc,ibf ect and just recognise The Ring champion as the real world champion.

The Ring Ratings, and ways to move up in rankings seem more fair and logical than the other sanctioning bodies, but the Ring doesn't sanction enough fights for it's system to work. They are also a group of writers and analysts who are biased towards certain fighters. I totally agree with the "What have you done lately" theory, as far as moving up in rankings, and for title shots, too bad the majority of the "Power Players" in boxing don't see it that way.

Actually, members here disregard the Ring Magazine rankings.

We only follow one ranking and sactioning body and that's Wacko's Druken Pound for Pound Rankings.

Wacko is a well established boxing fan and internet slob. He is the only source for recognition of clarity among saddoboxing.com members. He's also a drunk and loves Bernard Hopkins to death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Froggystyle

Actually, members here disregard the Ring Magazine rankings.

We only follow one ranking and sactioning body and that's Wacko's Druken Pound for Pound Rankings.

Wacko is a well established boxing fan and internet slob. He is the only source for recognition of clarity among saddoboxing.com members. He's also a drunk and loves Bernard Hopkins to death.

---

While many would disagree with the above statements...I do not. ;) ;D

Seriously...all sarcasm aside...I think that we actually all do pretty well with our rankings & it's great to know that even though we are still straightening it out...it does work for us all.

I do indeed rate Ring as it is a very very legit voice in the boxing world.














































































**I'm clicking you Froggy...just for the fact alone that I do find your sarcasm...amusing. ;) :coolclick:

Saddoboxing has got to have its own rankings system - hence Wacko's rankings.

However I believe instead of recognising the paper champions as ture champions at all, it would be better to recognise the Ring Champions IMO. They are a lot less corrupt and although some say there could be source of bias, I dont see it as a GROUP of sports writers should balance out their own personal bias. If the Ring rankings become widly recognised enough, Boxing might finally be saved from the alphabet soup madness that keeps so many casual and would be fans away and also prevents us from crowning true champs at any weight (particularly the once beloved heavyweight division).

In conclusion: Ring Good, Alphabet Paper Titles Bad O0

Anyone that hasn't already contributed to the P4P discussions & your take on the ranking...click the links below & get involved...remember...this is your list & you have just as much say so as anyone here...

http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxing_fo...c,27714.0.html

http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxing_fo...c,25602.0.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AC-Cobra

Saddoboxing has got to have its own rankings system - hence Wacko's rankings.

However I believe instead of recognising the paper champions as ture champions at all, it would be better to recognise the Ring Champions IMO. They are a lot less corrupt and although some say there could be source of bias, I dont see it as a GROUP of sports writers should balance out their own personal bias. If the Ring rankings become widly recognised enough, Boxing might finally be saved from the alphabet soup madness that keeps so many casual and would be fans away and also prevents us from crowning true champs at any weight (particularly the once beloved heavyweight division).

In conclusion: Ring Good, Alphabet Paper Titles Bad O0

---

You know...I see what you are saying...& I can to an extent see your point...but...in boxing & everything else in life...you have to take the good with the bad & there is always bad in sports of any kind...corruption runs rampant in football all the way down to something as obscure as racing...

I think that you have to make note of...if not recognizing the Alphabet titles & their champions...because again...like it or not...theyr'e always going to be there.

:coolclick: for your points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by porkypara

The thing that really pisses me off about modern day boxing is that people dont think that zab judah is the real champ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wacko3205

I KNOW, HOW ARE PEOPLE SO BLIND?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Froggystyle

you people know your shit, judah is the best boxing related entity currentley in existance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unknowndonor

FINALLY, something we can ALL agree on :)

---

---

---

---

DAMN STRAIGHT GUYS ;)

:puke:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wacko3205

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AC-Cobra

Saddoboxing has got to have its own rankings system - hence Wacko's rankings.

However I believe instead of recognising the paper champions as ture champions at all, it would be better to recognise the Ring Champions IMO. They are a lot less corrupt and although some say there could be source of bias, I dont see it as a GROUP of sports writers should balance out their own personal bias. If the Ring rankings become widly recognised enough, Boxing might finally be saved from the alphabet soup madness that keeps so many casual and would be fans away and also prevents us from crowning true champs at any weight (particularly the once beloved heavyweight division).

In conclusion: Ring Good, Alphabet Paper Titles Bad O0

---

You know...I see what you are saying...& I can to an extent see your point...but...in boxing & everything else in life...you have to take the good with the bad & there is always bad in sports of any kind...corruption runs rampant in football all the way down to something as obscure as racing...

I think that you have to make note of...if not recognizing the Alphabet titles & their champions...because again...like it or not...theyr'e always going to be there.

:coolclick: for your points.

---

Your right, the Alphabet titles are always gonna be there. In my eyes thats a HUGE shame.

Maybe I'm being naive due to my youth but I just believe that if enough respected people and organisations in boxing (chiefly the media and ESPN and HBO are pretty much there) get behing something like the Ring rankings, maybe the alphabet guys will become insignificatn and boxing fans will be able to say so and so is THE champion of the world not one champion of many which always seems pathetic. Of course the ideal situation would be for boxer's to turn their backs on the Alphabet Titles (there were promising signs when Tarver and Johnson done this for their rematch with the Ring Title on the line) so the organisations would no longer be profitable and would have to fade into Bolivian ;D, but that wont ever happen.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wacko3205

:puke:

---

;D ;D ;D

I'd would disagree that the Alphabets will always be there. The original boxing reform bill would have estrablished a Federal Boxing Commision that rules over all of the state agencies and was going to recognize only one belt and ranking system in the US. That means that in theory the alphabets could exist but that their belts could not be fought for in the US and that they could collect no sanctioning fees. Unfortunatly the lobbyist got to the bill and it ended up pretty worthless. Needless to saySen John Mccain feels passionately about the sport and is a possible front runner for the Presidency so maybe congress will revisit the legislation. I personally don't call anyone a champ if they don't have the Ring belt. I might refer to you as the best in your weight class, but to me the Ring is the only belt that has legit and uncompramised rankings so its the only belt worth the name Champion of the World. Just think if a Federal commision mandated that the Champ must fight one of the top three contenders at least annually, and that a top ten fighter must fight at least one top ten fighter to stay in the top ten. This would create great fights monthly and would force alot of fights onto free TV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VanChilds

I'd would disagree that the Alphabets will always be there. The original boxing reform bill would have estrablished a Federal Boxing Commision that rules over all of the state agencies and was going to recognize only one belt and ranking system in the US. That means that in theory the alphabets could exist but that their belts could not be fought for in the US and that they could collect no sanctioning fees. Unfortunatly the lobbyist got to the bill and it ended up pretty worthless. Needless to saySen John Mccain feels passionately about the sport and is a possible front runner for the Presidency so maybe congress will revisit the legislation. I personally don't call anyone a champ if they don't have the Ring belt. I might refer to you as the best in your weight class, but to me the Ring is the only belt that has legit and uncompramised rankings so its the only belt worth the name Champion of the World. Just think if a Federal commision mandated that the Champ must fight one of the top three contenders at least annually, and that a top ten fighter must fight at least one top ten fighter to stay in the top ten. This would create great fights monthly and would force alot of fights onto free TV.

---

Spot on mate,CC.

I think my point about why we should only recognise The Ring champions has come to light again as Ricky Hatton is getting strripped of his IBF belt for not fighting the IBF,s number 1 contender.

If boxing does not sort this multy champions per division it is going to die and not many people will care. :'(

we shud appoint a champ at each division...

for ww, we should appoint... i dont know........................... judah :D

Hmm 2 votes for no, can I take a crazy stab in the dark, and be as bold as to guess that those 2 are floyd mayweather nut-huggers? ;D ;D ;D