More bulls**t!! Andre Berto has a title shot vs Jan Zaveck on September 24th

[Ant Live]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.

Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

[MMASUX]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.
Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

I agree with this. If a fighter is not getting a rematch, #3 or lower sounds good. I don't understand the reasoning of getting a immediate title shot. We might as well give Pascal and David Haye a title shot again as well in their next fight back. The root of this problem is all the damn belts in the first place, if there wasn't so mant belts these guys wouldn't be getting a immediate "title" shot again. Get rid of most of the belts and we get rid of the problem.

[Kev]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.
Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

I agree with this. If a fighter is not getting a rematch, #3 or lower sounds good. I don't understand the reasoning of getting a immediate title shot. We might as well give Pascal and David Haye a title shot again as well in their next fight back. The root of this problem is all the damn belts in the first place, if there wasn't so mant belts these guys wouldn't be getting a immediate "title" shot again. Get rid of most of the belts and we get rid of the problem.

Actually the problem is your misunderstanding of what the belts are. There are 4 major belts in each weightclass. Therefore by fighting for one, in an ideal world the winner will be one of the 4 best fighters at that weight class.

The Ring rankings meanwhile have more real significance, with the Ring champion of each division being recognised as number in that division, most often there is no Ring champion at a weight class, as it requires unifying the belts.

So at welter, both Manny and Ortiz, the top two welters hold belts. Berto is rated number 3. Therefore he SHOULD be fighting for a belt for boxing to be fair and consistent. Surely the best and highest rated fighters should be getting the title shots.

He's fighting for Zaveck's strap, not for the Ring championship. If the winner of Berto Zaveck was to become the Ring champion then it would be a farce. But they will not. They will become a belt holder, a titlist, holding one of the 4 recognised belts.

This is entirely correct.

The problem is as I have stated before, some fans have an impossibly archaic view of what each belt represents. Winning a belt doesn't mean you are the best in the division, how can it, when there are three other belts. It just means you are one of the top 4 (ideal world). To know a fighters real ranking you turn to Ring magazine's rankings, and eventually if a fighter unifies they may end up as the Ring champion, and get a Ring belt presented to them. This is an honour that doesn't often happen as it's not easy to become a Ring champ.

There really isn't a whole lot wrong with the system, just many fans seem incapable of understanding it.

[MMASUX]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.
Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

I agree with this. If a fighter is not getting a rematch, #3 or lower sounds good. I don't understand the reasoning of getting a immediate title shot. We might as well give Pascal and David Haye a title shot again as well in their next fight back. The root of this problem is all the damn belts in the first place, if there wasn't so mant belts these guys wouldn't be getting a immediate "title" shot again. Get rid of most of the belts and we get rid of the problem.

Actually the problem is your misunderstanding of what the belts are. There are 4 major belts in each weightclass. Therefore by fighting for one, in an ideal world the winner will be one of the 4 best fighters at that weight class.

The Ring rankings meanwhile have more real significance, with the Ring champion of each division being recognised as number in that division, most often there is no Ring champion at a weight class, as it requires unifying the belts.

So at welter, both Manny and Ortiz, the top two welters hold belts. Berto is rated number 3. Therefore he SHOULD be fighting for a belt for boxing to be fair and consistent. Surely the best and highest rated fighters should be getting the title shots.

He's fighting for Zaveck's strap, not for the Ring championship. If the winner of Berto Zaveck was to become the Ring champion then it would be a farce. But they will not. They will become a belt holder, a titlist, holding one of the 4 recognised belts.

This is entirely correct.

The problem is as I have stated before, some fans have an impossibly archaic view of what each belt represents. Winning a belt doesn't mean you are the best in the division, how can it, when there are three other belts. It just means you are one of the top 4 (ideal world). To know a fighters real ranking you turn to Ring magazine's rankings, and eventually if a fighter unifies they may end up as the Ring champion, and get a Ring belt presented to them. This is an honour that doesn't often happen as it's not easy to become a Ring champ.

There really isn't a whole lot wrong with the system, just many fans seem incapable of understanding it.

I agree that the ring belt is the most legit belt out there and their ranking are usually spot on. But to say there is nothing wrong with the system when we have WBC silver, emeritus, and diamond champs. And WBA regular and super champs is just crazy to me. I guess i really don't have a problem with these two guys fighting each other, my beef is more with all the damn straps.

[Kev]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.
Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

I agree with this. If a fighter is not getting a rematch, #3 or lower sounds good. I don't understand the reasoning of getting a immediate title shot. We might as well give Pascal and David Haye a title shot again as well in their next fight back. The root of this problem is all the damn belts in the first place, if there wasn't so mant belts these guys wouldn't be getting a immediate "title" shot again. Get rid of most of the belts and we get rid of the problem.

Actually the problem is your misunderstanding of what the belts are. There are 4 major belts in each weightclass. Therefore by fighting for one, in an ideal world the winner will be one of the 4 best fighters at that weight class.

The Ring rankings meanwhile have more real significance, with the Ring champion of each division being recognised as number in that division, most often there is no Ring champion at a weight class, as it requires unifying the belts.

So at welter, both Manny and Ortiz, the top two welters hold belts. Berto is rated number 3. Therefore he SHOULD be fighting for a belt for boxing to be fair and consistent. Surely the best and highest rated fighters should be getting the title shots.

He's fighting for Zaveck's strap, not for the Ring championship. If the winner of Berto Zaveck was to become the Ring champion then it would be a farce. But they will not. They will become a belt holder, a titlist, holding one of the 4 recognised belts.

This is entirely correct.

The problem is as I have stated before, some fans have an impossibly archaic view of what each belt represents. Winning a belt doesn't mean you are the best in the division, how can it, when there are three other belts. It just means you are one of the top 4 (ideal world). To know a fighters real ranking you turn to Ring magazine's rankings, and eventually if a fighter unifies they may end up as the Ring champion, and get a Ring belt presented to them. This is an honour that doesn't often happen as it's not easy to become a Ring champ.

There really isn't a whole lot wrong with the system, just many fans seem incapable of understanding it.

I agree that the ring belt is the most legit belt out there and their ranking are usually spot on. But to say there is nothing wrong with the system when we have WBC silver, emeritus, and diamond champs. And WBA regular and super champs is just crazy to me. I guess i really don't have a problem with these two guys fighting each other, my beef is more with all the damn straps.

I agree the diamond belts suck and are just ridiculous. But this is absolutely a great fight that is good for boxing that it got made. As I keep saying, the Ring no 3 against the Ring no 4, the top rated guys are fighting each other which is what boxing should be about.

This thread is so misguided it's untrue.

Why should Zaveck be denied his chance as champion, to fight the top rated guy, on the biggest stage, and make his American HBO debut? Isn't that what we want champions to do, to fight the best opposition?

No saying this relates to you, but I just think that a big part of the problem of boxing is idiot fans who have no idea what they are talking about and just moan and gripe about everything.

[marbleheadmaui]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.
Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

I agree with this. If a fighter is not getting a rematch, #3 or lower sounds good. I don't understand the reasoning of getting a immediate title shot. We might as well give Pascal and David Haye a title shot again as well in their next fight back. The root of this problem is all the damn belts in the first place, if there wasn't so mant belts these guys wouldn't be getting a immediate "title" shot again. Get rid of most of the belts and we get rid of the problem.

Actually the problem is your misunderstanding of what the belts are. There are 4 major belts in each weightclass. Therefore by fighting for one, in an ideal world the winner will be one of the 4 best fighters at that weight class.

The Ring rankings meanwhile have more real significance, with the Ring champion of each division being recognised as number in that division, most often there is no Ring champion at a weight class, as it requires unifying the belts.

So at welter, both Manny and Ortiz, the top two welters hold belts. Berto is rated number 3. Therefore he SHOULD be fighting for a belt for boxing to be fair and consistent. Surely the best and highest rated fighters should be getting the title shots.

He's fighting for Zaveck's strap, not for the Ring championship. If the winner of Berto Zaveck was to become the Ring champion then it would be a farce. But they will not. They will become a belt holder, a titlist, holding one of the 4 recognised belts.

This is entirely correct.

The problem is as I have stated before, some fans have an impossibly archaic view of what each belt represents. Winning a belt doesn't mean you are the best in the division, how can it, when there are three other belts. It just means you are one of the top 4 (ideal world). To know a fighters real ranking you turn to Ring magazine's rankings, and eventually if a fighter unifies they may end up as the Ring champion, and get a Ring belt presented to them. This is an honour that doesn't often happen as it's not easy to become a Ring champ.

There really isn't a whole lot wrong with the system, just many fans seem incapable of understanding it.

There is a TON wrong with this sytem.

1. Calling beltholders "champions" devalues the meaning of the word champion. What Sergio Martinez is and what Saul Alvarez is are not remotely comparable;
2. Having multiple beltholders in each division prevents the casual fan from quickly identifying the top fighter
3. Casual fans being unable to quickly identify top fighters prevents fighters from becoming household names.
4. Having only 1-2 household names at a time in the sport damages it. There needs to be 8-10 household names. How does on create that? Well a major step would be to simplify the "championship" identification
5. Belts PREVENT big fights from being made.
6. Beltholders are routinely recategorized to create yet more beltholders. Now Bradley's belt is being taken so Erik Morales has a chance to win a strap. While I have great respect for Terrible? This is a sham, one of just many examples.

[Master]

Do not see these titles as world champions, more just getting in line to be the number 1 or to fight the number 1 in the division. Eric Morales may fight for a strap but no one will consider him the best at the weight unless you are Sulliman.

[marbleheadmaui]

Do not see these titles as world champions, more just getting in line to be the number 1 or to fight the number 1 in the division. Eric Morales may fight for a strap but no one will consider him the best at the weight unless you are Sulliman.

But if the bold is the point then the bels just confuse the matter. Use Ring rankings instead. Plus the belts today are an impediment to getting a division's pecking order cleaned up. These organizations prevent good fights from being made by threatening to strip fighters.

[Kev]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.

Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

I could agree with you if the fighter who lost the championship fight was a challenger but Berto wasn't. He was the defending champion and it was his sixth world title defence.

How many times in a row do you have to win world championship fights in your eyes to be worth an immediate shot at another when you lose your title in a highly competitive, fight of the year contender.

Berto is still the third best welterweight according to Ring magazine. Higher than Zaveck. This is the best possible matchup.

What I find so ironic is that when Saul Alvarez announced he was fighting Alfonso Gomez people said that was bullshit and he should fight a real contender. Hilariously someone even said he should have fought Sechew Powell or Cory Spinks, despite Spinks having lost 3 of his last 4 and both Spinks and Powell losing world championship challenges in their last fight.

If Zaveck doesn't fight Berto he has to fight an unknown, unproven contender who has done nothing themsleves to deserve a title shot.

When the Ring number 4 defends his belt against the Ring number 3, with 2 and 1 already signed to other fights, this represents the best boxing matchup available.

And as I said at the start, Berto wasn't a guy who lost his title challenge, he was a legit champion who had already defended the belt 5 times when he lost. Of course he deserves an immediate shot at another belt, and to suggest he doesn't shows an astonishing lack of knowledge of boxing history where such a thing is standard practice, and rightly so, we want the best fighters fighting the best fights.

[TheMacMagician]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.

Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

I could agree with you if the fighter who lost the championship fight was a challenger but Berto wasn't. He was the defending champion and it was his sixth world title defence.

How many times in a row do you have to win world championship fights in your eyes to be worth an immediate shot at another when you lose your title in a highly competitive, fight of the year contender.

Berto is still the third best welterweight according to Ring magazine. Higher than Zaveck. This is the best possible matchup.

What I find so ironic is that when Saul Alvarez announced he was fighting Alfonso Gomez people said that was bullshit and he should fight a real contender. Hilariously someone even said he should have fought Sechew Powell or Cory Spinks, despite Spinks having lost 3 of his last 4 and both Spinks and Powell losing world championship challenges in their last fight.

If Zaveck doesn't fight Berto he has to fight an unknown, unproven contender who has done nothing themsleves to deserve a title shot.

When the Ring number 4 defends his belt against the Ring number 3, with 2 and 1 already signed to other fights, this represents the best boxing matchup available.

And as I said at the start, Berto wasn't a guy who lost his title challenge, he was a legit champion who had already defended the belt 5 times when he lost. Of course he deserves an immediate shot at another belt, and to suggest he doesn't shows an astonishing lack of knowledge of boxing history where such a thing is standard practice, and rightly so, we want the best fighters fighting the best fights.

I think this is a great fight, and should be a decent show. Not sure about the belt on the line, but hey, belts don't make the fighters. Hopefully they will put up a good show and Zaveck will make a good account of himself. I remember exchanging some messages with Randall Bailey earlier in the year and he was certain he was matching up with Zaveck this summer. Is he not with Lou DiBella too?

No way is this fight anything like the JOKE that is Alvarez vs Gomez. No way in hell Gomez should be there. Berto vs Zaveck is a good fight though IMO.

[Kev]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.

Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

I could agree with you if the fighter who lost the championship fight was a challenger but Berto wasn't. He was the defending champion and it was his sixth world title defence.

How many times in a row do you have to win world championship fights in your eyes to be worth an immediate shot at another when you lose your title in a highly competitive, fight of the year contender.

Berto is still the third best welterweight according to Ring magazine. Higher than Zaveck. This is the best possible matchup.

What I find so ironic is that when Saul Alvarez announced he was fighting Alfonso Gomez people said that was bullshit and he should fight a real contender. Hilariously someone even said he should have fought Sechew Powell or Cory Spinks, despite Spinks having lost 3 of his last 4 and both Spinks and Powell losing world championship challenges in their last fight.

If Zaveck doesn't fight Berto he has to fight an unknown, unproven contender who has done nothing themsleves to deserve a title shot.

When the Ring number 4 defends his belt against the Ring number 3, with 2 and 1 already signed to other fights, this represents the best boxing matchup available.

And as I said at the start, Berto wasn't a guy who lost his title challenge, he was a legit champion who had already defended the belt 5 times when he lost. Of course he deserves an immediate shot at another belt, and to suggest he doesn't shows an astonishing lack of knowledge of boxing history where such a thing is standard practice, and rightly so, we want the best fighters fighting the best fights.

I think this is a great fight, and should be a decent show. Not sure about the belt on the line, but hey, belts don't make the fighters. Hopefully they will put up a good show and Zaveck will make a good account of himself. I remember exchanging some messages with Randall Bailey earlier in the year and he was certain he was matching up with Zaveck this summer. Is he not with Lou DiBella too?

No way is this fight anything like the JOKE that is Alvarez vs Gomez. No way in hell Gomez should be there. Berto vs Zaveck is a good fight though IMO.

ha and that's the biggest irony of all. When Berto fights Zaveck he will likely be a huge betting favourite to win as he's one of the very best fighters in the weight class. People on here though seem to think it's more credible for boxing to give a guy like Randall Bailey or Lujon a shot, guys that Berto would despatch easily because they somehow make more legitmate world champs.

I just can't understand the rationale.

I would think that the best thing for boxing is that the best fighters get to fight for and win the world title belts. But apparantly not

[TheMacMagician]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.

Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

I could agree with you if the fighter who lost the championship fight was a challenger but Berto wasn't. He was the defending champion and it was his sixth world title defence.

How many times in a row do you have to win world championship fights in your eyes to be worth an immediate shot at another when you lose your title in a highly competitive, fight of the year contender.

Berto is still the third best welterweight according to Ring magazine. Higher than Zaveck. This is the best possible matchup.

What I find so ironic is that when Saul Alvarez announced he was fighting Alfonso Gomez people said that was bullshit and he should fight a real contender. Hilariously someone even said he should have fought Sechew Powell or Cory Spinks, despite Spinks having lost 3 of his last 4 and both Spinks and Powell losing world championship challenges in their last fight.

If Zaveck doesn't fight Berto he has to fight an unknown, unproven contender who has done nothing themsleves to deserve a title shot.

When the Ring number 4 defends his belt against the Ring number 3, with 2 and 1 already signed to other fights, this represents the best boxing matchup available.

And as I said at the start, Berto wasn't a guy who lost his title challenge, he was a legit champion who had already defended the belt 5 times when he lost. Of course he deserves an immediate shot at another belt, and to suggest he doesn't shows an astonishing lack of knowledge of boxing history where such a thing is standard practice, and rightly so, we want the best fighters fighting the best fights.

I think this is a great fight, and should be a decent show. Not sure about the belt on the line, but hey, belts don't make the fighters. Hopefully they will put up a good show and Zaveck will make a good account of himself. I remember exchanging some messages with Randall Bailey earlier in the year and he was certain he was matching up with Zaveck this summer. Is he not with Lou DiBella too?

No way is this fight anything like the JOKE that is Alvarez vs Gomez. No way in hell Gomez should be there. Berto vs Zaveck is a good fight though IMO.

ha and that's the biggest irony of all. When Berto fights Zaveck he will likely be a huge betting favourite to win as he's one of the very best fighters in the weight class. People on here though seem to think it's more credible for boxing to give a guy like Randall Bailey or Lujon a shot, guys that Berto would despatch easily because they somehow make more legitmate world champs.

I just can't understand the rationale.

I would think that the best thing for boxing is that the best fighters get to fight for and win the world title belts. But apparantly not

Dead right. In this case, as much as I don't like Berto and his huggy style, there isn't anyone better. Although, at that stage it may have been good to see Mike Jones vs Andre Berto, would have been a better fight than against Zaveck, but I'll still be happy to watch a Berto vs Zaveck match-up.

[marbleheadmaui]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.

Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

I could agree with you if the fighter who lost the championship fight was a challenger but Berto wasn't. He was the defending champion and it was his sixth world title defence.

How many times in a row do you have to win world championship fights in your eyes to be worth an immediate shot at another when you lose your title in a highly competitive, fight of the year contender.

Berto is still the third best welterweight according to Ring magazine. Higher than Zaveck. This is the best possible matchup.

What I find so ironic is that when Saul Alvarez announced he was fighting Alfonso Gomez people said that was bullshit and he should fight a real contender. Hilariously someone even said he should have fought Sechew Powell or Cory Spinks, despite Spinks having lost 3 of his last 4 and both Spinks and Powell losing world championship challenges in their last fight.

If Zaveck doesn't fight Berto he has to fight an unknown, unproven contender who has done nothing themsleves to deserve a title shot.

When the Ring number 4 defends his belt against the Ring number 3, with 2 and 1 already signed to other fights, this represents the best boxing matchup available.

And as I said at the start, Berto wasn't a guy who lost his title challenge, he was a legit champion who had already defended the belt 5 times when he lost. Of course he deserves an immediate shot at another belt, and to suggest he doesn't shows an astonishing lack of knowledge of boxing history where such a thing is standard practice, and rightly so, we want the best fighters fighting the best fights.

I think this is a great fight, and should be a decent show. Not sure about the belt on the line, but hey, belts don't make the fighters. Hopefully they will put up a good show and Zaveck will make a good account of himself. I remember exchanging some messages with Randall Bailey earlier in the year and he was certain he was matching up with Zaveck this summer. Is he not with Lou DiBella too?

No way is this fight anything like the JOKE that is Alvarez vs Gomez. No way in hell Gomez should be there. Berto vs Zaveck is a good fight though IMO.

ha and that's the biggest irony of all. When Berto fights Zaveck he will likely be a huge betting favourite to win as he's one of the very best fighters in the weight class. People on here though seem to think it's more credible for boxing to give a guy like Randall Bailey or Lujon a shot, guys that Berto would despatch easily because they somehow make more legitmate world champs.

I just can't understand the rationale.

I would think that the best thing for boxing is that the best fighters get to fight for and win the world title belts. But apparantly not

The best thing for boxing is to ignore the alphabet belts entirely and to embrace good fights and ridicule bad ones being disguised as good fights.

[Fenster]

Good for Berto and his team for getting this fight. But IMO, if a fighter lose in a championship fight, if there's no rematch, he should have to work his way back up to a title shot. Maybe automatically dropping their ranking to 3. In which if the champion fight his mandatory #1, the he should or have to fight the #2 guy for a possible title shot.

Saying that, if Berto win, his next fight will be high profile.
1. A rematch with Ortiz whether he lose to Mayweather or pull off the upset. FOY2
2. Mayweather whether he win or lose. MONEY!!!
3. Bradley?
4. Khan?

I could agree with you if the fighter who lost the championship fight was a challenger but Berto wasn't. He was the defending champion and it was his sixth world title defence.

How many times in a row do you have to win world championship fights in your eyes to be worth an immediate shot at another when you lose your title in a highly competitive, fight of the year contender.

Berto is still the third best welterweight according to Ring magazine. Higher than Zaveck. This is the best possible matchup.

What I find so ironic is that when Saul Alvarez announced he was fighting Alfonso Gomez people said that was bullshit and he should fight a real contender. Hilariously someone even said he should have fought Sechew Powell or Cory Spinks, despite Spinks having lost 3 of his last 4 and both Spinks and Powell losing world championship challenges in their last fight.

If Zaveck doesn't fight Berto he has to fight an unknown, unproven contender who has done nothing themsleves to deserve a title shot.

When the Ring number 4 defends his belt against the Ring number 3, with 2 and 1 already signed to other fights, this represents the best boxing matchup available.

And as I said at the start, Berto wasn't a guy who lost his title challenge, he was a legit champion who had already defended the belt 5 times when he lost. Of course he deserves an immediate shot at another belt, and to suggest he doesn't shows an astonishing lack of knowledge of boxing history where such a thing is standard practice, and rightly so, we want the best fighters fighting the best fights.

I think this is a great fight, and should be a decent show. Not sure about the belt on the line, but hey, belts don't make the fighters. Hopefully they will put up a good show and Zaveck will make a good account of himself. I remember exchanging some messages with Randall Bailey earlier in the year and he was certain he was matching up with Zaveck this summer. Is he not with Lou DiBella too?

No way is this fight anything like the JOKE that is Alvarez vs Gomez. No way in hell Gomez should be there. Berto vs Zaveck is a good fight though IMO.

ha and that's the biggest irony of all. When Berto fights Zaveck he will likely be a huge betting favourite to win as he's one of the very best fighters in the weight class. People on here though seem to think it's more credible for boxing to give a guy like Randall Bailey or Lujon a shot, guys that Berto would despatch easily because they somehow make more legitmate world champs.

I just can't understand the rationale.

I would think that the best thing for boxing is that the best fighters get to fight for and win the world title belts. But apparantly not

The best thing for boxing is to ignore the alphabet belts entirely and to embrace good fights and ridicule bad ones being disguised as good fights.

Glad to see you've come around to my way of thinking.

The quality of fight is FAR more important than any title attached to it.

[Hunter]

I dont think it is BS. Berto is a talented young fighter with one loss coming off a great performance against Ortiz. The guy has a fan friendly style.