Ring Magazine on the Road to Sanity

[marbleheadmaui]

Did Nigel really ask that dumb ass question ? Probally why I have not purchased an issue in 2 + years

Sounds like they want cover for a decision they've already come to. I am happy to help give air cover.

[Spicoli]

Did Nigel really ask that dumb ass question ? Probally why I have not purchased an issue in 2 + years

Sounds like they want cover for a decision they've already come to. I am happy to help give air cover.

I guess they have regressed or giving into group think in regards to mentioning alphabet soup. I remember an issue in which they made a 'mission statement' of sorts as to why they stopped listing the 3 bodies rankings and I.D ing them in own rankings a number of years ago. I can't envision anyone taking exception to them dropping them let alone to them giving merit to that silly "Super-mega-ultra" Champion stuff.

[Kev]

Did Nigel really ask that dumb ass question ? Probally why I have not purchased an issue in 2 + years

Sounds like they want cover for a decision they've already come to. I am happy to help give air cover.

I guess they have regressed or giving into group think in regards to mentioning alphabet soup. I remember an issue in which they made a 'mission statement' of sorts as to why they stopped listing the 3 bodies rankings and I.D ing them in own rankings a number of years ago. I can't envision anyone taking exception to them dropping them let alone to them giving merit to that silly "Super-mega-ultra" Champion stuff.

Yeah I don't know anybody who follows the official rankings of the alphabets. I don't even know who holds what belts let alone who is the IBF top 10 at 140 say. It's of no importance to hardly anyone, the Ring rankings have always been where it's at.

This is why it baffles me when peoplle suddenly treat a belt as if it's a holy, sacred item of unimaginable prestige. Berto musn't be allowed to fight for the IBF belt after coming off a loss! Manny cannot claim a 154 lb title at a catchweight of 150!! Alvavrez should never have been allowed to fight for a belt and be champ.

Really, what does it matter? Nobody pays attention the organisations anyway, they are just there to give a title and some recognition to the top fighters of the moment.

I like the alphabets for that reason. Every sportsman who dedicates 20 odd years amatuer and pro to his craft wants to be able to wins things. All other sports have dozens of trophies, competitions etc up for grabs, and boxing follows suits with 4 titles in each weight class, thus giving the thousands of professional boxers out there the hope of fighting for something meaningful, even if it's not accepted as such by the fans. The fans in boxing have a very self centred approach to their sport imo.

[Spicoli]

They have their entertainment value Bilbo. Sort of like watching a pig farmer wear a blindfold & sort random heads then demand the 1st lb. In fantasy land the orginizations would keep it literal and have number one meet the champ and rankings below meet in eliminations to earn way to top. If your ranked # 10 for Christ sake you should at least defeat a SINGLE guy ranked ahead of you to earn a shot. But the networks would hate that and its not like we fans actually want to see fighters we've never heard of more than once on HBO anyway. I think HBO and Showtime have tunnel vision, and we drink the kool aid.

They 'can' matter but yes, having a belt used to mean something. As it should. Just because its common now to hand them out like door prizes doesn't mean fans aren't right to call bullshit on it when they see it.

[Kev]

They have their entertainment value Bilbo. Sort of like watching a pig farmer wear a blindfold & sort random heads then demand the 1st lb. In fantasy land the orginizations would keep it literal and have number one meet the champ and rankings below meet in eliminations to earn way to top. If your ranked # 10 for Christ sake you should at least defeat a SINGLE guy ranked ahead of you to earn a shot. But the networks would hate that and its not like we fans actually want to see fighters we've never heard of more than once on HBO anyway. I think HBO and Showtime have tunnel vision, and we drink the kool aid.

They 'can' matter but yes, having a belt used to mean something. As it should. Just because its common now to hand them out like door prizes doesn't mean fans aren't right to call bullshit on it when they see it.

With 4 belts you simply can't have the best ranked fighters fighting for each belt as it would be the same guys ranked the same in each organisation.

I think of each organisation seperately, just like in MMA. So Cain Valesquez is the UFC world champ whilst Allister Overeem is the Strikeforce world champ. Actually I think he just got injured and stripped but the point remains. Two world champs, two different organisations.

Well boxing's roster is probably 100 times bigger than the UFC. There are probably 250 UFC contracted fighters and maybe 100 in Strikforce versus maybe 10,000 pro boxers so as the contention rate is much lower 1:1500 per weight class vs maybe 1:100 in the UFC and Strikeforce they have 4 orgainisations instead of two.

It's no problem to me. Considering the welterweight division has 1483 boxers in it (boxrec) and the UFC has maybe 63 fighters in it's welterweight division then even with 4 belts it's still far harder to win a world title in boxing than it is in the UFC.

Fans seem to ignore this. A sportsman who is dedicating his life to his sport wants to have belts, trophies, etc to aim for. Having 4 organisations gives hope to more pro's that one day they can fight for and win a world title and probably keeps them in the sport.

They are not bad for boxing, rather they are necessary for boxing.

[Mars_ax]

I could be all wrong about this, but as flawed as they are, for the most part I don't have a problem with the "alphabet titles". It gives more Pugs a chance to pick up a strap, and titles translate to money and prestige getting spread around.

I also don't like the idea of "Ring" being able to call all the shots, sorry Marb, I disagree with you on this one, and agree more with Bilbo.

[Kev]

I could be all wrong about this, but as flawed as they are, for the most part I don't have a problem with the "alphabet titles". It gives more Pugs a chance to pick up a strap, and titles translate to money and prestige getting spread around.

I also don't like the idea of "Ring" being able to call all the shots, sorry Marb, I disagree with you on this one, and agree more with Bilbo.

Damn, I was really getting into this and ready to go another 12 rounds

That is a big point though. One champ, one weight class is an incredibly small allocation of reward for success. It means of the 10,000 or so current pro boxers 9900 will never have a chance at anything.

With those odds, I'd pick a different sport to participate in.

If professional MMA continues to grow they will experience the same problem down the line too. When there are a few thousand pro MMA fighters the UFC will lose its monopoly as most fighters will be unhappy to be fighting for nothing and new organisations will be formed and become more appealing.

Maui believes alphabets are responsible for a decline in boxing I disagree. I think they are a necessary response to an increased number of professionals in the sport. Maybe PPV has damaged boxing as the big fights are't on terrestrial tv any more. You can't be household names when you aren't being showcased in the household, and that means terrestrial free tv available to all.

Also I take issue with the idea the big fights are prevented from being made because of the alphabet titles. Do we have any examples of this? I think they are make the big fights MORE likely to happen as one guy has something to offer the other guy.

Maui is living in an imagined past and has totally lost touch with boxing reality.

[marbleheadmaui]

They have their entertainment value Bilbo. Sort of like watching a pig farmer wear a blindfold & sort random heads then demand the 1st lb. In fantasy land the orginizations would keep it literal and have number one meet the champ and rankings below meet in eliminations to earn way to top. If your ranked # 10 for Christ sake you should at least defeat a SINGLE guy ranked ahead of you to earn a shot. But the networks would hate that and its not like we fans actually want to see fighters we've never heard of more than once on HBO anyway. I think HBO and Showtime have tunnel vision, and we drink the kool aid.

They 'can' matter but yes, having a belt used to mean something. As it should. Just because its common now to hand them out like door prizes doesn't mean fans aren't right to call bullshit on it when they see it.

With 4 belts you simply can't have the best ranked fighters fighting for each belt as it would be the same guys ranked the same in each organisation.

I think of each organisation seperately, just like in MMA. So Cain Valesquez is the UFC world champ whilst Allister Overeem is the Strikeforce world champ. Actually I think he just got injured and stripped but the point remains. Two world champs, two different organisations.

Well boxing's roster is probably 100 times bigger than the UFC. There are probably 250 UFC contracted fighters and maybe 100 in Strikforce versus maybe 10,000 pro boxers so as the contention rate is much lower 1:1500 per weight class vs maybe 1:100 in the UFC and Strikeforce they have 4 orgainisations instead of two.

It's no problem to me. Considering the welterweight division has 1483 boxers in it (boxrec) and the UFC has maybe 63 fighters in it's welterweight division then even with 4 belts it's still far harder to win a world title in boxing than it is in the UFC.

Fans seem to ignore this. A sportsman who is dedicating his life to his sport wants to have belts, trophies, etc to aim for. Having 4 organisations gives hope to more pro's that one day they can fight for and win a world title and probably keeps them in the sport.

They are not bad for boxing, rather they are necessary for boxing.

Laughing

Necessary? Hardly. The sport thrived with TWICE as many fighters in only eight divisions with only eight belts.

Now? The sport is on a respirator.

[Kev]

They have their entertainment value Bilbo. Sort of like watching a pig farmer wear a blindfold & sort random heads then demand the 1st lb. In fantasy land the orginizations would keep it literal and have number one meet the champ and rankings below meet in eliminations to earn way to top. If your ranked # 10 for Christ sake you should at least defeat a SINGLE guy ranked ahead of you to earn a shot. But the networks would hate that and its not like we fans actually want to see fighters we've never heard of more than once on HBO anyway. I think HBO and Showtime have tunnel vision, and we drink the kool aid.

They 'can' matter but yes, having a belt used to mean something. As it should. Just because its common now to hand them out like door prizes doesn't mean fans aren't right to call bullshit on it when they see it.

With 4 belts you simply can't have the best ranked fighters fighting for each belt as it would be the same guys ranked the same in each organisation.

I think of each organisation seperately, just like in MMA. So Cain Valesquez is the UFC world champ whilst Allister Overeem is the Strikeforce world champ. Actually I think he just got injured and stripped but the point remains. Two world champs, two different organisations.

Well boxing's roster is probably 100 times bigger than the UFC. There are probably 250 UFC contracted fighters and maybe 100 in Strikforce versus maybe 10,000 pro boxers so as the contention rate is much lower 1:1500 per weight class vs maybe 1:100 in the UFC and Strikeforce they have 4 orgainisations instead of two.

It's no problem to me. Considering the welterweight division has 1483 boxers in it (boxrec) and the UFC has maybe 63 fighters in it's welterweight division then even with 4 belts it's still far harder to win a world title in boxing than it is in the UFC.

Fans seem to ignore this. A sportsman who is dedicating his life to his sport wants to have belts, trophies, etc to aim for. Having 4 organisations gives hope to more pro's that one day they can fight for and win a world title and probably keeps them in the sport.

They are not bad for boxing, rather they are necessary for boxing.

Laughing

Necessary? Hardly. The sport thrived with TWICE as many fighters in only eight divisions with only eight belts.

Now? The sport is on a respirator.

Maybe the fans were loving it, but how many boxers were thriving as a result of entertaining you?

How many great fighters of the past were rewarded for their greatness by becoming incredibly wealthy men? Most of them quit broke because they didn't see jack shit of the revenue back then. They had to fight every few weeks and that was the champions!

Good luck with trying to convince today's fighters to give up their belts and 4/5ths of their income because you want only one of them in each weight class having the honour of being called champion.

Sport has evolved since the 40's and 50's and now it's big money. Now the sportsmen are properly rewarded in all major sports and expect to be so.

Why would somebody take up boxing if there was no chance of winning anything and thus earning anything?

You say people turn up to football and hockey matches for games that don't mean anything, that's ridiculous? In the UK football is life and death for some people. A teams position in the league, and progress in the FA cup, to say nothing of the progress in the European cups is literally the most important thing in many British men's lives. Every game is for a title, the premier league, championship, league one, league two etc. Not a single team from premiership down to amatuer pub 5 a sides does not compete for a title of some sort, it's the exact opposite of what you are arguing. Likewise with American football and hockey. All the teams are competing for something!

Your viewpoint is totally selfish just thinking of your perpspective as a fan. If you cared about the fighters you'd be happy to see them rewarded for their efforts, the same way professionals are in other major sports.

[Conrad]

It's weird, I've always thought that the countless alphabets were bad for boxing as I felt it diluted the words 'world champion' somewhat. But the more I think about it the more I think Bilbo is right.

It doesn't really matter anymore how many world champions we have as we all pretty much know who's number 1 in each division thanks to The Ring.

I'm still undecided on whether the numerous belts get in the way of big fights happening though...

[marbleheadmaui]

It's weird, I've always thought that the countless alphabets were bad for boxing as I felt it diluted the words 'world champion' somewhat. But the more I think about it the more I think Bilbo is right.

It doesn't really matter anymore how many world champions we have as we all pretty much know who's number 1 in each division thanks to The Ring.

I'm still undecided on whether the numerous belts get in the way of big fights happening though...

They do.

[NuthaPug]

Where would unification be without alphabet soup?

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

My head hurts. Seriously, I'm between a rock & a hard place on this one.

I mean, the ABC's 'in theory' are fine yet their ranking systems and multi interim straps are so corrupting and toxic. Who's to say a Magazine can't go the same way?All they are doing is offering yet another alternative albeit via collusion/ monopoly/ slander whatever you wanna call it.

Am I the only one who realises that it doesn't take a magazine to establish lineage

So then surely it's another load of crap smothered in crap

[VictorCharlie]

My head hurts. Seriously, I'm between a rock & a hard place on this one.

I mean, the ABC's 'in theory' are fine yet their ranking systems and multi interim straps are so corrupting and toxic. Who's to say a Magazine can't go the same way?All they are doing is offering yet another alternative albeit via collusion/ monopoly/ slander whatever you wanna call it.

Am I the only one who realises that it doesn't take a magazine to establish lineage

So then surely it's another load of crap smothered in crap

Rankings are purely subjective but when have you read the Ring rankings and thought that their #1 contender was in no way even close to being a top 10 fighter? Now think of how many garbage mandatory defenses we have seen over the years. I am not beholden to the Ring rankings but I can't really think of anyone currently that provides a better set.