Quote Originally Posted by Master View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Primo Carnera View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Master View Post
Quote Originally Posted by smashup View Post
He's already been stripped of the Ring belt as of yesterday 😉
I was saying they should give it to the winner of AJ v Parker and not wait for AJ v Wilder.
Their argument made perfect sense. they don't want to give it to the #1 v #3 when #2 is fighting and active. they want to wait till Joshua fights Wilder. there's enough organisations giving out bullshit trinkets, they want this to be more meaningful.
Number 1 and 3 are undefeated champions so it is meaningful. If AJ was a yank or signed up with GBP I am sure this would have enjoyed been for the Ring belt.
The way I see it, the Ring want their "Belt" to be for the stand out best guy in the division. So they don't see no.1 v no.3 being good enough, because they feel no.2 has a squeak of beating no.1.
How would you feel if they classed no.1 as Wilder and no. 3 as Ortiz and decided that would be for the Ring belt? It's not inconceivable and would be as equally unfair.