In the most recent Letter's to the Editor of Ring Magazine, Editor Nigel Collins has said the following:

It is, however, getting increasingly difficult to distinguish between the ever-increasing number of so-called alphabet champions because of the preposterous “interim,” “super,” “regular,” and “emeritus” categories created by the organizations. Consequently, The Ring is considering dropping all mention of them in the future and would be interested in knowing how other readers feel about such a move.

Here's the e-mail I sent.

Sir,

On behalf of right thinking boxing fans everywhere, I implore you and Ring Magazine to cease all mention of the alphabet belts. They damage the concept of a champion, they confuse the casual fan, they prevent top fights from being made and they damage the overall integrity of the sport.

I’d also ask you to take two further steps in this area. Call a conference among yourselves, HBO, Showtime, ESPN and any other major network that is willing to participate and try to make the following deal:
• The Networks agree only to refer to or mention the Ring Belt and Ring Magazine rankings in all their broadcasts;
• Ring Magazine agrees to make their advisory panel the determinative group in deciding rankings so no one can claim Oscar’s business interests are leaking into the editorial decisions and Ring agrees to use its best efforts to fill in some of the vacant championships over the next year. That would mean in EVERY case where #1 faces #3 in a vacant championship situation the belt will be on the line and that if #1 will not fight #2 or #3 than #2 and #3 can meet for the belt. This would help the networks with marketing and only temporarily dilute what Ring does.

Your magazine is a beacon of sanity in a crazy boxing environment. Please use that influence.

My fellow Saddo-ites. Please let Ring Magazine know your feelings on this as this would be a MAJOR first step in damaging the visibility of these fraudulent straps. Send an e-mail to

AskTheEditor@ringtv.com.