how is the ring belt organised, is it loadsa experts or summit![]()
I always thought the WBC belt was the most prestigious but now-a-days all the alphabet titles mean very little. The RING belt is the one to look out for because not every division has a champion. That belt has to be earned.
The WBC is the one that has the most clout, but I tend to look at the alphabet titles as pieces of a pie, the more of those four a fighter has, the more claim they have to being the champ of a division. Ultimately the ring title trumps them all, and the WBA has made it more confusing by adding the superchamp status, which makes me have less of a regard for that organization.
For every story told that divides us, I believe there are a thousand untold that unite us.
The Ring Champ has to lose his title in the ring, move weight classes or retire. If the title is vacated (due to retirement or moving weightclasses) then the number 1 and number 2 (sometimes number 3) ring ranked fighters have to fight to establish a new Ring Champ, if this doesn't happen there simply isn't a champ. The Ring does not strip titles, nor do they have silly things like Emeritus, Vacant, Regional or Super titles.
For every story told that divides us, I believe there are a thousand untold that unite us.
id say definetly the WBC then wba and ibf are fairly equal, WBO is the least prestegious, if joe c had held the WBC from the start his record might well look alotg better imo, people just dont want the wbo belt
ring belt for me trumps all though
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks