Re: Should Hatton ditch the IBO belt and just keep The Ring belt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preme
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
To say that the belt means nothing is a bit ridiculous.
He fought to get the belt & he was proud to earn it. People kill me with S*** like this.
It's a long running arguement with the belts & their meanings but anyone that says belts mean nothing...you've probably never fought for one.
No offense. ;D
Sorry wack, but the IBO give him the belt after the IBF stripped him of theirs.
I know what you mean about belts and their meanings, to me the best belt is the one the best fighters have, BUT > The ring pawns all... if there was no ring belt then i could see why hatton would go for the IBO, but as the ring champ, honestly? the belt is pointless to me.
Odd...for some reason I thought that he fought Urango for that belt. Oh well...mistakes will be made but the point is that fighters do have a strap or two & they do mean something to them.
Re: Should Hatton ditch the IBO belt and just keep The Ring belt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preme
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
To say that the belt means nothing is a bit ridiculous.
He fought to get the belt & he was proud to earn it. People kill me with S*** like this.
It's a long running arguement with the belts & their meanings but anyone that says belts mean nothing...you've probably never fought for one.
No offense. ;D
Sorry wack, but the IBO give him the belt after the IBF stripped him of theirs.
I know what you mean about belts and their meanings, to me the best belt is the one the best fighters have, BUT > The ring pawns all... if there was no ring belt then i could see why hatton would go for the IBO, but as the ring champ, honestly? the belt is pointless to me.
Odd...for some reason I thought that he fought Urango for that belt. Oh well...mistakes will be made but the point is that fighters do have a strap or two & they do mean something to them.
Yeah Ricky won it by facing Urango.
Everytime Ricky Gets wins new belt he gets a miniaturised duplicate made for his son Campbell. The IBO made him one up, no prob after the Urango fight
Re: Should Hatton ditch the IBO belt and just keep The Ring belt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
To say that the belt means nothing is a bit ridiculous.
He fought to get the belt & he was proud to earn it. People kill me with shit like this.
It's a long running arguement with the belts & their meanings but anyone that says belts mean nothing...you've probably never fought for one.
No offense. ;D
The IBO belt means fuck all.
Its just a paper title invented by greedy self serving peolpe who want to make an easy few quid.
Re: Should Hatton ditch the IBO belt and just keep The Ring belt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lance Uppercut
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
I've never heard Michael Buffer announce a fighter 'And now making his way to the ring, the undefeated Ring Champion of the World.........', doesn't happen.
Michael Buffer annouced the Bernard Hopkins vs Winky Wright fight as being for the Ring Light Heavyweight Championship, and annouced the winner the same way.
Actually though this highlights just how wrong the Ring Magazine can be sometimes though. I mean not only was this probably one of the only times a fight has been announced as for a Ring belt, but it was an otherwise non title affair between two old timers that virtually everyone on here was unanimous in expressing that they had zreo interest in seeing them fight at all.
Furthermore that it was labelled as being for the Ring belt at 175 is an absolute farce seeing as they actually fought at 170 lbs ???
If Winky would have won then are you saying he would have been the legitimate MAN at 175 despite never having fought a fight there?
And actually Bernard's position as the 175 lb champion is hardly particularly credible anyhow seeing as he has no intention of ever defending his belt, or of fighting any of the other champions in that weight class.
Right now Bernard resides in some kind of limbo weight zone of his own devising, waiting opportunistically for a chance to fight someone like Jermain Taylor or Joe Calzaghe, most likely at either 168 or 170 lbs.
He is NOT the real champion at 175 by virtue of the fact that he has no intention of ever fighting in that division again. Right now there is no true champion at 175 lbs imo. ;)
It's actually even more ironic when you consider that following the fight Emmmanuel Steward, Lampley and most people on here were saying that Bernard should retire, and that he was clearly past his best and no longer a factor in the division. Steward also said Winky's legs had gone and he should consider retiring too. Not saying I agree with this just pointing out that it hardly paints a picture of either of these being considered the real threats in whatever division they happen to be fighting in now does it?
Re: Should Hatton ditch the IBO belt and just keep The Ring belt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by lance Uppercut
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
I've never heard Michael Buffer announce a fighter 'And now making his way to the ring, the undefeated Ring Champion of the World.........', doesn't happen.
Michael Buffer annouced the Bernard Hopkins vs Winky Wright fight as being for the Ring Light Heavyweight Championship, and annouced the winner the same way.
Actually though this highlights just how wrong the Ring Magazine can be sometimes though. I mean not only was this probably one of the only times a fight has been announced as for a Ring belt, but it was an otherwise non title affair between two old timers that virtually everyone on here was unanimous in expressing that they had zreo interest in seeing them fight at all.
Furthermore that it was labelled as being for the Ring belt at 175 is an absolute farce seeing as they actually fought at 170 lbs ???
If Winky would have won then are you saying he would have been the legitimate MAN at 175 despite never having fought a fight there?
And actually Bernard's position as the 175 lb champion is hardly particularly credible anyhow seeing as he has no intention of ever defending his belt, or of fighting any of the other champions in that weight class.
Right now Bernard resides in some kind of limbo weight zone of his own devising, waiting opportunistically for a chance to fight someone like Jermain Taylor or Joe Calzaghe, most likely at either 168 or 170 lbs.
He is NOT the real champion at 175 by virtue of the fact that he has no intention of ever fighting in that division again. Right now there is no true champion at 175 lbs imo. ;)
It's actually even more ironic when you consider that following the fight Emmmanuel Steward, Lampley and most people on here were saying that Bernard should retire, and that he was clearly past his best and no longer a factor in the division. Steward also said Winky's legs had gone and he should consider retiring too. Not saying I agree with this just pointing out that it hardly paints a picture of either of these being considered the real threats in whatever division they happen to be fighting in now does it?
Although I am a big supporter of the Ring titles, I think you point out it's only flaw: without mandatories, a fighter can just sit on their belt. Hopkins will probably never fight a top 175lb guy again, but he beat the man who beat the man... and is technically the Light Heavyweight Champ.
Sitting on titles was not uncommon in the old days. Jack Dempsy, Jess Willard and even James Braddock had two year gaps in between some of their title defenses.
Re: Should Hatton ditch the IBO belt and just keep The Ring belt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
To say that the belt means nothing is a bit ridiculous.
He fought to get the belt & he was proud to earn it. People kill me with S*** like this.
It's a long running arguement with the belts & their meanings but anyone that says belts mean nothing...you've probably never fought for one.
No offense. ;D
I once fought another crack head for a peice of extension cord he was using...
I'm still using soggy string from a mail bag... :-\
Re: Should Hatton ditch the IBO belt and just keep The Ring belt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitmandonny
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preme
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
To say that the belt means nothing is a bit ridiculous.
He fought to get the belt & he was proud to earn it. People kill me with S*** like this.
It's a long running arguement with the belts & their meanings but anyone that says belts mean nothing...you've probably never fought for one.
No offense. ;D
Sorry wack, but the IBO give him the belt after the IBF stripped him of theirs.
I know what you mean about belts and their meanings, to me the best belt is the one the best fighters have, BUT > The ring pawns all... if there was no ring belt then i could see why hatton would go for the IBO, but as the ring champ, honestly? the belt is pointless to me.
Odd...for some reason I thought that he fought Urango for that belt. Oh well...mistakes will be made but the point is that fighters do have a strap or two & they do mean something to them.
Yeah Ricky won it by facing Urango.
Everytime Ricky Gets wins new belt he gets a miniaturised duplicate made for his son Campbell. The IBO made him one up, no prob after the Urango fight
yeh he also won the ibf when he fought urango so its not like he just went for ibo belt...it just sorta came with winning his old belt back.
