WBO is pretty legit belt imo. There are fighters that we call "real champion" and "paper champ". I guess it all depends on which fighter holding it.
Thanks: 0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Array
WBO is pretty legit belt imo. There are fighters that we call "real champion" and "paper champ". I guess it all depends on which fighter holding it.
Array
Whether the wbo is a title or not, there De La Hoya still isn't even a 10x titleist; let alone 10 time champion. Look at his record
Oscar De La Hoya
Teddy Atlas was right to call bull shit.
Array
#1 Jimmy Bredahl, WBO Jr. Lightweight
#2 Jorge Paez, WBO Lightweight
#3 Rafael Ruelas, IBF Lightweight (unified WBO/IBF)
#4 Julio Cesar Chavez, WBC Jr. Welterweight
#5 Pernell Whitaker, WBC Welterweight
#6 WBC Welterweight (he was re-instated as the WBC before the 1st Mosley fight, it's bullshit but it happened)
#7 Javier Castillejo, WBC Jr.Middleweight
#8 Fernando Vargas, WBA Jr. Middleweight (unified WBC/WBA)
#9 Felix Sturm, WBO Middleweight (bullshit but so many others have bullshit titles as well)
#10 Ricardo Mayorga, WBC Jr. Middleweight
Array
He was already the WBO light weight champion, you cant count that has a new title reign. Otherwise, that would have made Mike Tyson a 3 time heavyweight champion by the time he was 21.
What? how is that supposed to count as a different title reign?
Once again, counting unification as 2 different title reigns.
If anything this thread has given me more respect for Teddy Atlas, for calling bull shit when he sees bullshit.
Array
Array
Who cares how many alphabet titles a fighter collects? "Won-loss" records are a better measuring stick. Especially when you factor in "quality of opponents" and where those opponents were in their careers when they faced the fighter.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks