Siren1927 Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Where is the ring belt option? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamasadlittleboy Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 IBF seem to be keeping out of trouble. Their upcoming middleweight tournament, their Heavyweight eliminators, their weigh in rules...they may not be WBA bad but they aren't crystal clean They are trying. The Heavyweight tournament was a decent idea its just that the original fighters invited in: Boytsov, Dimitchenko, Mormeck had other things to do. grin// So instead they choose to have: Chambers v Rossy and Thompson v Harris -_-...and they end up getting a fighter that Wlads already beaten anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WelshDevilRob Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 IBF seem to be keeping out of trouble. Their upcoming middleweight tournament, their Heavyweight eliminators, their weigh in rules...they may not be WBA bad but they aren't crystal clean They are trying. The Heavyweight tournament was a decent idea its just that the original fighters invited in: Boytsov, Dimitchenko, Mormeck had other things to do. grin// So instead they choose to have: Chambers v Rossy and Thompson v Harris -_-...and they end up getting a fighter that Wlads already beaten anyway They can't be blamed for trying to put something into effect and making the fighters earn the shots rather than just sitting around and waiting for their 2nd shot at the title. Or would you rather Chambers and Thompson get awarded an interim or Silver belt? Seems to me the IBF are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamasadlittleboy Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 IBF seem to be keeping out of trouble. Their upcoming middleweight tournament, their Heavyweight eliminators, their weigh in rules...they may not be WBA bad but they aren't crystal clean They are trying. The Heavyweight tournament was a decent idea its just that the original fighters invited in: Boytsov, Dimitchenko, Mormeck had other things to do. grin// So instead they choose to have: Chambers v Rossy and Thompson v Harris -_-...and they end up getting a fighter that Wlads already beaten anyway They can't be blamed for trying to put something into effect and making the fighters earn the shots rather than just sitting around and waiting for their 2nd shot at the title. Or would you rather Chambers and Thompson get awarded an interim or Silver belt? Seems to me the IBF are damned if they do and damned if they don't. I'd rather they forced either good fighters to face off (Arreola v Chambers and Thompson v Helenius for example, again you might end up with the same scenario but it'd have been one where the fighters would have earned their chance). They should make fighters earn a shot by beating good fighters. Mo Harris and Derrick Rossy shouldn't have ever been involved in an eliminator type of tournament, thats where the blame lies with the IBF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littleman370 Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 IBF seem to be keeping out of trouble. Their upcoming middleweight tournament, their Heavyweight eliminators, their weigh in rules...they may not be WBA bad but they aren't crystal clean They are trying. The Heavyweight tournament was a decent idea its just that the original fighters invited in: Boytsov, Dimitchenko, Mormeck had other things to do. grin// So instead they choose to have: Chambers v Rossy and Thompson v Harris -_-...and they end up getting a fighter that Wlads already beaten anyway They can't be blamed for trying to put something into effect and making the fighters earn the shots rather than just sitting around and waiting for their 2nd shot at the title. Or would you rather Chambers and Thompson get awarded an interim or Silver belt? Seems to me the IBF are damned if they do and damned if they don't. I'd rather they forced either good fighters to face off (Arreola v Chambers and Thompson v Helenius for example, again you might end up with the same scenario but it'd have been one where the fighters would have earned their chance). They should make fighters earn a shot by beating good fighters. Mo Harris and Derrick Rossy shouldn't have ever been involved in an eliminator type of tournament, thats where the blame lies with the IBF. it seems to me this is like buying your girlfriend/wife flowers she's allergic to...sure, you bought her flowers but she can't enjoy them because of the allergy. we get a box off, which is pretty cool, but it falls apart when people don't want to take the tough route to the top. (why would they? if haye loses to wlad, all of these guys are viable top contenders again!!!! 'scuse me while i vomit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
telboy66 Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 There should have been a position on the voting for "none of the above" then I would vote, there is not one of them worth a bucket of cold piss. they all pay lip service to boxers welfare, you get a title shot at one of the numerous belt not on ability but on how much you can put in their pension pot, there is only one belt that has any honour to it & that's by far the best the Lonsdale belt the rest are garbage little wonder that Ridick Bowe threw one in the bin it's where they belong. Real boxing fans know who the best at each weight is without a tardy piece of plastic draped over the shoulder, the sooner us the fans stop buying into the promoters hype & only show interest in competitive matches then some common sense may return Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DemolitionDan Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 Definitely not the WBA. WBC is falling off with their silver belts and all that other nonsense. The WBO and IBF definitely don't seem as bad...yet. I guess the WBO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londoner Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 there is only one belt that has any honour to it & that's by far the best the Lonsdale belt I agree. The Lonsdale belt and the Ring belt are the two best belts in the World IMO. The Lonsdale belt is the oldest belt in the World and British fighters have an obvious respect for it and the Ring belt is only offered to the winner of fights between the number 1 and number 2 fighters in each division. The others are farcical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
telboy66 Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 there is only one belt that has any honour to it & that's by far the best the Lonsdale belt I agree. The Lonsdale belt and the Ring belt are the two best belts in the World IMO. The Lonsdale belt is the oldest belt in the World and British fighters have an obvious respect for it and the Ring belt is only offered to the winner of fights between the number 1 and number 2 fighters in each division. The others are farcical. The only problem I have with the Ring belt is that the Ring being owned by Golden Boy they have a vested interest in who gets selected, to me it would have more credence if it were independently owned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now