The Saddoboxing Sanctioning body

[Spicoli]

Yeah pretty obvious choices there, another thing Id like is fighters will be able to be ranked in multiple weights e.g. say Mosley beats Forrest at 154 he would become ranked at 154 & 147 but if he goes over something like a year not fighting in one weight he'll be removed from that weight class... oh & I like the idea of holding multiple championships in different weights but I think there should be some sorta limit on defending the championship say 2 years without defending your title would be classed as relinquishing it!

Ok let's establish reasons for vacancy.

1. A fight announces his retirement he is immediately removed.

2. A fighter ranked #1 - #10 that doesn't fight in a weightclass for a year vacates that spot.

3. A Champion that doesn't defend in that weight class in 2 years vacates the title.

It doesn't have to be that long, I just think its a suffucant amount of time. If a fighter hasn't fought at that weight for 2 years its more than likely they won't be back... I think after 1 year of not defending if a fight between the #1 & #2 is made then we could vote to see if that fight should be considered as a championship fight. If in 2 years of not defending then the title becomes vacant...

But would'nt a meeting of 1 and 2 constitute a previous consideration,or just establish a mandatory challenger.If a guy wins in year one,he can also sit on the sideline hoping the Champ does the same.Just might become blurred as to what actually determines a Championship fight with the vote??Dont mind me,off for three days and indulging in liquids...ahem

[Galaxy]

Ok let's establish reasons for vacancy.

1. A fight announces his retirement he is immediately removed.

2. A fighter ranked #1 - #10 that doesn't fight in a weightclass for a year vacates that spot.

3. A Champion that doesn't defend in that weight class in 2 years vacates the title.

It doesn't have to be that long, I just think its a suffucant amount of time. If a fighter hasn't fought at that weight for 2 years its more than likely they won't be back... I think after 1 year of not defending if a fight between the #1 & #2 is made then we could vote to see if that fight should be considered as a championship fight. If in 2 years of not defending then the title becomes vacant...

But would'nt a meeting of 1 and 2 constitute a previous consideration,or just establish a mandatory challenger.If a guy wins in year one,he can also sit on the sideline hoping the Champ does the same.Just might become blurred as to what actually determines a Championship fight with the vote??Dont mind me,off for three days and indulging in liquids...ahem

What I mean is that once a champion is established he must defend his title at least once a year from the date he won it. Every fight at that weight would be considered at defense for him. If he goes over that year period without defending (due to inactivity or fighting at other weights, not injury) then if the #1 & #2 contenders sign to fight sometime in the next 12 months following then it could qualify as fight to crown a new champion.

[JazMerkin]

Saddo's is becoming the new Ring

Great job killer, when is the planned date for this being due?

I'd be interested in being one of the judges, at least for UK screened fights if that's possible. How will the judges be chosen?

[ukansodoff]

All fights are chosen by us as the goverming body (or 1 in every 2). Everything negotiation wise from venue, ticket prices, promotions, purse, Everything will be left to the promotions teams but if they hit too many stumbling blocks we intervene and what ever we say goes.

We need to make sure the best fights happen, fair fights happen and no super shit excuses are made for fights not happening. Then we wont have people lingerin in the top 10 never gettin a shot when others get plenty of shots just cuz they got a decent fan base.

And when your the world champ all your fights are mandatory defences. You may be your own man but when you have 1 of our belts unless you wana give it back you will fight who we say cuz we wana know whose really the best.

Ofcourse theres room for appeals in all of this for the sake of fairness.

[killersheep]

Saddo's is becoming the new Ring

Great job killer, when is the planned date for this being due?

I'd be interested in being one of the judges, at least for UK screened fights if that's possible. How will the judges be chosen?

Just pass a test that shows you know how to score rounds and pay the small liscensing fee

[killersheep]

Since you have to beat a fighter to get their rank, how would we handle this situation?

Fighter ranked #2 and Fighter ranked #3 fight.

#2 Wins, would #3 keep his spot or be moved down a rank?

I would like to make them move down a rank.

[HattonTheHammer]

WBC championship
WBO championship
then a collection of various organisations all put together to make one solid cast iron championship belt

Mandatorys considered non-optional only if theyre is a clear case for a fighter to choose to fight in a more lucrative fight ie:vitali klitschko doesnt lose his title for opting to fight david haye rather than a lesser mandatory opponent.

oh and bring back the super-heavyweight division so we can have freaks like valuev out of the real division

[Spicoli]

It doesn't have to be that long, I just think its a suffucant amount of time. If a fighter hasn't fought at that weight for 2 years its more than likely they won't be back... I think after 1 year of not defending if a fight between the #1 & #2 is made then we could vote to see if that fight should be considered as a championship fight. If in 2 years of not defending then the title becomes vacant...

But would'nt a meeting of 1 and 2 constitute a previous consideration,or just establish a mandatory challenger.If a guy wins in year one,he can also sit on the sideline hoping the Champ does the same.Just might become blurred as to what actually determines a Championship fight with the vote??Dont mind me,off for three days and indulging in liquids...ahem

What I mean is that once a champion is established he must defend his title at least once a year from the date he won it. Every fight at that weight would be considered at defense for him. If he goes over that year period without defending (due to inactivity or fighting at other weights, not injury) then if the #1 & #2 contenders sign to fight sometime in the next 12 months following then it could qualify as fight to crown a new champion.

Aha I gotcha now.One thing I'd add is that a reigning champion cannot division jump to test the waters at higher/lower weight and keep championship.This may seem uptight but I think it would maintain structure in division.Am I off? Just a personal dislike the leaping.Chances are highly likely that any succsess at higher weight translates to that champion never returning to legitiment threats....cough Pac.....cough

[killersheep]

But would'nt a meeting of 1 and 2 constitute a previous consideration,or just establish a mandatory challenger.If a guy wins in year one,he can also sit on the sideline hoping the Champ does the same.Just might become blurred as to what actually determines a Championship fight with the vote??Dont mind me,off for three days and indulging in liquids...ahem

What I mean is that once a champion is established he must defend his title at least once a year from the date he won it. Every fight at that weight would be considered at defense for him. If he goes over that year period without defending (due to inactivity or fighting at other weights, not injury) then if the #1 & #2 contenders sign to fight sometime in the next 12 months following then it could qualify as fight to crown a new champion.

Aha I gotcha now.One thing I'd add is that a reigning champion cannot division jump to test the waters at higher/lower weight and keep championship.This may seem uptight but I think it would maintain structure in division.Am I off? Just a personal dislike the leaping.Chances are highly likely that any succsess at higher weight translates to that champion never returning to legitiment threats....cough Pac.....cough

I see what you are saying. Maybe we should just say a champ that doesn't defend his title for a year vacates automatically. Let's say for example JMM who is the champ at 135 moves to 140 and fights an unranked fighter JMM by right gets put in the 140 lb. pool, but if he does not defend at 135 within a year of his last defense there he gets dropped to the 135 pool as well.

[killersheep]

We are going to need a lot of threads for ranking votes for this. We should we make a home for this?

[Galaxy]

Since you have to beat a fighter to get their rank, how would we handle this situation?

Fighter ranked #2 and Fighter ranked #3 fight.

#2 Wins, would #3 keep his spot or be moved down a rank?

I would like to make them move down a rank.

The only problen for me is things like draws... where would Juarez rate at 126 after the John fight? Would he take the position below John or not get ranked at all because he didn't win just put in the pool? Controversial loses should also get you placed in the pool. But I'm cool with fighters moving down a spot. Maybe 1 spot for a close or controversial loss, 2 spots for a wide decision & 3 for a KO loss... something like that, depending if they lost to a higher, lower or unranked opponent. I'd like it if that that lost to a lower ranked fighter they would swap... say #4 loses to #7 they would swap. If a rated fighter lost would it mean they exit automatically? If they are in the bottom 5 I think they should, top 5 move down according to the way they lost.

But would'nt a meeting of 1 and 2 constitute a previous consideration,or just establish a mandatory challenger.If a guy wins in year one,he can also sit on the sideline hoping the Champ does the same.Just might become blurred as to what actually determines a Championship fight with the vote??Dont mind me,off for three days and indulging in liquids...ahem

What I mean is that once a champion is established he must defend his title at least once a year from the date he won it. Every fight at that weight would be considered at defense for him. If he goes over that year period without defending (due to inactivity or fighting at other weights, not injury) then if the #1 & #2 contenders sign to fight sometime in the next 12 months following then it could qualify as fight to crown a new champion.

Aha I gotcha now.One thing I'd add is that a reigning champion cannot division jump to test the waters at higher/lower weight and keep championship.This may seem uptight but I think it would maintain structure in division.Am I off? Just a personal dislike the leaping.Chances are highly likely that any succsess at higher weight translates to that champion never returning to legitiment threats....cough Pac.....cough

What I mean is that once a champion is established he must defend his title at least once a year from the date he won it. Every fight at that weight would be considered at defense for him. If he goes over that year period without defending (due to inactivity or fighting at other weights, not injury) then if the #1 & #2 contenders sign to fight sometime in the next 12 months following then it could qualify as fight to crown a new champion.

Aha I gotcha now.One thing I'd add is that a reigning champion cannot division jump to test the waters at higher/lower weight and keep championship.This may seem uptight but I think it would maintain structure in division.Am I off? Just a personal dislike the leaping.Chances are highly likely that any succsess at higher weight translates to that champion never returning to legitiment threats....cough Pac.....cough

I don't mind the division hopping, especially if its for making good fighters. Plus I'd like the fighters of today to have the opportunity to try & achieve what the legendary Armstrong did even if it is a very minute possibility. Example would be Jones Jr returning from heavy after the Ruiz fight... I had no problem with that, even if I preferred he stayed at heavy.

I see what you are saying. Maybe we should just say a champ that doesn't defend his title for a year vacates automatically. Let's say for example JMM who is the champ at 135 moves to 140 and fights an unranked fighter JMM by right gets put in the 140 lb. pool, but if he does not defend at 135 within a year of his last defense there he gets dropped to the 135 pool as well.

Yeah I think a year is sufficiant. Even Mayweather was defending his 147 pound championship once a year.

Using your example of JMM if he defeated a rated fighter at 140 he would take that ranking & if he was champ at 135 he'd still retain it for a year without defending it. I think thats fair.

[Spicoli]

I can live with a year.Also Galaxy about draws.....how about an immediate rematch,taking into consideration injuries,cuts etc.100 days with no other fights permitted??We have to do something different,shake it up.Both retain rankings as prior to the fight,if they opt for another fight...they drop from the top ten?I know some draws can be results of tightly fought affairs but they are also inconclusive and well...draws

[Galaxy]

I can live with a year.Also Galaxy about draws.....how about an immediate rematch,taking into consideration injuries,cuts etc.100 days with no other fights permitted??We have to do something different,shake it up.Both retain rankings as prior to the fight,if they opt for another fight...they drop from the top ten?I know some draws can be results of tightly fought affairs but they are also inconclusive and well...draws

I don't know? Few things to think abount with draws...

What if the fight is crap & no one wants to see it again? There maybe other bigger fights at the weight that maybe just as important.

Not all draws are between top ranked fighters lets say for example a rated fighter draws with a unrated fighter & the decision was controversial (the rated fighter should have won) do you think its fair for the rated fighter to be removed after 100 days because he didn't rematch the unrated fighter because there might have been a bigger fight for him?

I don't think tech draws should be counted in regards to earning a ranking. If rated fighters fight to a tech draw their ranks should remain the same. If a unrated fights a ranked & it ends in a technical draw the ranked fight should remain the same & the unrated should be placed in the pool.

My opinion is that if a fight ends in a draw over the distance then the lower rated or unrated fighter should take the spot below the higher.
_

One other thing.. I think we have to follow the official decisions even if we don't agree with them. But this may lead to some unworthy fighters becoming ranked. e.g. your boy Humberto Soto officially lost the 1st Lorenzo fight, that would have landed Lorenzo 4th by our ratings system. But we would have to stand by our system no matter how bogus the decision is!

[killersheep]

I can live with a year.Also Galaxy about draws.....how about an immediate rematch,taking into consideration injuries,cuts etc.100 days with no other fights permitted??We have to do something different,shake it up.Both retain rankings as prior to the fight,if they opt for another fight...they drop from the top ten?I know some draws can be results of tightly fought affairs but they are also inconclusive and well...draws

I don't know? Few things to think abount with draws...

What if the fight is crap & no one wants to see it again? There maybe other bigger fights at the weight that maybe just as important.

Not all draws are between top ranked fighters lets say for example a rated fighter draws with a unrated fighter & the decision was controversial (the rated fighter should have won) do you think its fair for the rated fighter to be removed after 100 days because he didn't rematch the unrated fighter because there might have been a bigger fight for him?

I don't think tech draws should be counted in regards to earning a ranking. If rated fighters fight to a tech draw their ranks should remain the same. If a unrated fights a ranked & it ends in a technical draw the ranked fight should remain the same & the unrated should be placed in the pool.

My opinion is that if a fight ends in a draw over the distance then the lower rated or unrated fighter should take the spot below the higher.
_

One other thing.. I think we have to follow the official decisions even if we don't agree with them. But this may lead to some unworthy fighters becoming ranked. e.g. your boy Humberto Soto officially lost the 1st Lorenzo fight, that would have landed Lorenzo 4th by our ratings system. But we would have to stand by our system no matter how bogus the decision is!

A draw should have no effect on the rankings!! Since they are fighting for the rank you have to win to take it.

I think as Galazy mentioned a scale to dropping ranks 1 for a close loss, 2 for a clear loss, 3 for a blowout loss. I don't know if I agree with the switching positions thing though I'm gonna have to run through some scenarios on Excel :P

[Trainer Monkey]

How about no Tomato Can padding your record so it looks nicer then it really is?
You'll constantly see a guy with like an 18-0 record,and then you go look at who he's fought,and about the only thing you can think is,"I didnt even know that guy was still alive"