Timothy Bradley, Kendall Holt

eagle eye

I watched this fight last night. I was impressed in some ways with both fighters but they both still have questions to answer. I won't give the result of it just yet in case some are waiting from copies of the fight.

For me though they are the two best outside of Manny Pacquaio and Ricky Hatton.

Just wondering what your thoughts are on both fighters. I certainly think one of them would give Hatton a serious fight if not both of them.

nacho libre

Witter doesn't seem too eager to get back in the ring with Bradley. With that in mind considering Witter was so anxious for ages to fight hatton, it certainly would be interesting to see how his conqueror(Bradley) would fare against Hatton

Big Ears

nacho libre wrote: »

Witter doesn't seem too eager to get back in the ring with Bradley. With that in mind considering Witter was so anxious for ages to fight hatton, it certainly would be interesting to see how his conqueror(Bradley) would fare against Hatton

Speaking of Junior Witter he's just become a very important figure in the life of Paul McCloskey.

Branco has vacated the title to move up in weight. Which imo was just a way of Branco avoiding another loss which probably would be the end of him.

Anyway Witter v McCloskey has been mandated for the vacant European title and the fight will actually happen because the proposed Devon Alexander bout v Witter isn't going to.
The WBC have named Devon Alexander mandatory(which will probably leave Witter livid), which makes no sense to me as Alexander has barely done enough done enough to even be rated by the WBC.

I don't think Holt or Bradley would fair very well versus Hatton.
Holt showed how mentally weak he can be versus Bradley and was easily hurt and discouraged to the body which would result in serious trouble v Hatton. One thing that wasn't showed up however was Holt's questionable chin but have no fear I'm sure Hatton would show that up if a fight was to happen anyway.

A Bradley fight would be much tougher but I just don't see Bradley being good enough. I think at best he could lose a competitive 116-112 decision if he boxes to his best but I'd fancy him to be beaten more soundly than that.

People tend to underate Hatton at times, the last time he took on the #1 contender at the weight(Paulie Malignaggi) he beat him easily. People criticised Malignaggi for an awful performance, but that performance was caused by Hatton. Many fancied Paulie to win after his showings against Cotto and N'Dou in their first fight but Hatton even in a more boxing like display imposed himself on him and was too much.

The time before that when Hatton fought his #1 contender he knocked him out in 4 rounds with a bodyshot having won every previous round.

Even against a strong fighter like Urango(and Lazcano aswell), fights where Hatton struggled at times, he won by a country mile and Urango has been very impressive since. IMO the Hitman has too much for anyone at the weight, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see it.

I'd like to see Bradley take on Juan Manuel Marquez if Marquez is determined on fighting the Hatton v Pacquiao winner. That fight to me makes sense and the winner would clearly have a greater claim than anyone else to fight the winner of Hatton-Pacquiao.

eagle eye

I don't think Marquez will fight anybody at the weight except in a marquis fight which is either Hatton or Pacquiao.

I think Holt was shown up a bit last night but he does possess power, I think he needs to up his workrate but I do think he has a lot going for him, his power being one and his boxing skills when he does decide to show them, especially that jab are impressive. On the minus his jaw is always going to be questionable and what looked bad for him last night was his unwilingness to get involved and try and control the fight after such a positive start. I think the guy has a lot to offer but whether we will ever see him reach his true potential is another matter entirely. His corner was giving him good advice but he seemed unable or unwilling to follow that advice.

Bradley for me is a great lad, I really like him, he gives his all but has a wise head on his shoulders. That was shown when he went down in the first round, he got straight up but then went to his knee and took the count. As you mentioned he switched to the body and it worked, but he listens to his corner and seems to be able to change his style and point of attack. Now the fact that he was caught twice last night is a concern but its the only one I have. He responded positively both times which would make you think he has a solid chin but he should never have got caught like that at the end of the last round.

Maybe Urango is his next fight, thats what I'd like to see, if he beats him then he can set his sights on Hatton or Pacquiao or even Marquez if he does indeed move up.

Big Ears

eagle eye wrote: »

I don't think Marquez will fight anybody at the weight except in a marquis fight which is either Hatton or Pacquiao.

I think Holt was shown up a bit last night but he does possess power, I think he needs to up his workrate but I do think he has a lot going for him, his power being one and his boxing skills when he does decide to show them, especially that jab are impressive. On the minus his jaw is always going to be questionable and what looked bad for him last night was his unwilingness to get involved and try and control the fight after such a positive start. I think the guy has a lot to offer but whether we will ever see him reach his true potential is another matter entirely. His corner was giving him good advice but he seemed unable or unwilling to follow that advice.

Bradley for me is a great lad, I really like him, he gives his all but has a wise head on his shoulders. That was shown when he went down in the first round, he got straight up but then went to his knee and took the count. As you mentioned he switched to the body and it worked, but he listens to his corner and seems to be able to change his style and point of attack. Now the fact that he was caught twice last night is a concern but its the only one I have. He responded positively both times which would make you think he has a solid chin but he should never have got caught like that at the end of the last round.

Maybe Urango is his next fight, thats what I'd like to see, if he beats him then he can set his sights on Hatton or Pacquiao or even Marquez if he does indeed move up.

Even though I mentioned Bradley v Marquez as being perfect you're right it won't happen. Marquez's camp would see it as too much risk(imo Bradley would wear him down and stop him) and they could blow a major payday for an average one.

Bradley won't be fighting Urango next though. Urango is going up to Welterweight to fight Andre Berto for his WBC title and the IBF Light-Welterweight title will presumely become vacant.
Ricardo Torres would be a great next fight for Bradley but the word is Torres could be moving up.

Bradley will be fighting Devon Alexander next after that, I reckon Nate Campbell could be involved.

nacho libre

I can't see Bradley stopping Marquez if they ever fought. Marquez defies the odds so many times. I'm not sure Bradley would beat Hatton but it would be a tough fight. If Hatton did beat Bradley i wonder what Witter would say.:pac: Marquez main priorirty is to get a rematch with Pacquaio. If Pacman loses to Hatton look for the trilogy to be made. Should Hatton win then we can look forward to a rematch with Mayweather.

Anyway, I hope McCloskey can beat Witter.

joepenguin

Bradley-Cambell would be a good one, and the ibf title could be added to that collection. I think its important that there is a very clear number 2 light welterweight for when Hatton retires. The only people involved with the linear 140lb title will be Hatton, pacman, marquez, mayweather(if he comes back and would fight at that weight) and with all due respect none of those guys are thinking about anyone else outside of that circle.
McLoskey-Witter would be brilliant.

Big Ears

I think Marquez could probably still make Super-Featherweight, and he's very small at Lightweight. He was shaken pretty badly by Juan Diaz who is a non puncher at the weight and stops people(if at all) by accumulation and Diaz really isn't that big a Lightweight either.

Bradley would just have too much power, not that he's a huge banger but he's got average power at Light-Welterweight and I feel that would be too much for Marquez. The natural size and strength difference would be absolutely huge aswell and while Marquez no doubt has more than enough skill to outbox the American I just couldn't see him lasting 12. Too big and too strong imo.

I dunno Joe I think there is room for one more but while Bradley is with Showtime it won't be him, if he can get himself onto HBO he just might have a chance of becomming involved in that bunch. Afterall Hatton loves titles and the only 2 he hasn't held at the weight are the WBC and WBO which Bradley possesses. No to mention Bradley has a win over Witter and beating the man that beat Witter would certainly please Hatton and Hatton(who puts the Ring in high regard) would also see Bradley as the #1 Ring contender.

If I was a betting man I certainly wouldn't fancy it, but I don't think it's impossible and if Bradley could get wins over Alexander, Campbell and another fighter at the weight who's highly thought of then he's got a good chance. If he picked up one of the other two titles I could definitely see it happening.

joepenguin

You make a good case Big, but Bradely would need to become a marquee name by beating a big name fighter. There really isnt all that many at 140 really, its pretty much Hatton, Pac and the rest are way below in terms of €uro$. Bradley could pick up at least one of those other belts with ease. At the moment though he has bigger frys to scoff.:D

joepenguin

Bradely given the ulimatum by wbc: keep either the wbo belt, or the wbc belt... but not both!!

http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=19332

thats a disgrace, he really is looking to unify the division. I know Hatton is the linear and true champ but he wont be fighting any of the other 140lb champs in the near future so i think its important there is someone there that is say the interim undisputed champ. someone that when hatton retires we can say yep, that guy is number one.

The wbc have said that if he gives up the belt then the 2 highest ranking fighters will compete for it. I note that Hatton is rated 5th and Manny is rated 3rd by the wbc at 140. Id say they are doing the sums, 3% of a hatton-manny fight or 3% of a bradley vs tba fight... hmm? of course this is if manny and hatton want to fight for the belt. Hatton has never had the wbc belt, its the same one witter lost also. manny has had the wbc belt at a few weights now. Both fighters are way bigger than any belt but it seems a little coincidental that bradley has until april 20th!!


Pity McLoskey wasnt up there in the rankings (unless im looking at old ones)

http://www.wbcboxing.com/WBCboxing/Portal/cfpages/contentmgr.cfm?docId=102&docTipo=4&orderby=docid&sortby=ASC

if he beats witter you never know.

Big Ears

joepenguin wrote: »

Bradely given the ulimatum by wbc: keep either the wbo belt, or the wbc belt... but not both!!

http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=19332

thats a disgrace, he really is looking to unify the division. I know Hatton is the linear and true champ but he wont be fighting any of the other 140lb champs in the near future so i think its important there is someone there that is say the interim undisputed champ. someone that when hatton retires we can say yep, that guy is number one.

The wbc have said that if he gives up the belt then the 2 highest ranking fighters will compete for it. I note that Hatton is rated 5th and Manny is rated 3rd by the wbc at 140. Id say they are doing the sums, 3% of a hatton-manny fight or 3% of a bradley vs tba fight... hmm? of course this is if manny and hatton want to fight for the belt. Hatton has never had the wbc belt, its the same one witter lost also. manny has had the wbc belt at a few weights now. Both fighters are way bigger than any belt but it seems a little coincidental that bradley has until april 20th!!


Pity McLoskey wasnt up there in the rankings (unless im looking at old ones)

http://www.wbcboxing.com/WBCboxing/Portal/cfpages/contentmgr.cfm?docId=102&docTipo=4&orderby=docid&sortby=ASC

if he beats witter you never know.

If Bradley is stripped it'll be Witter and Devon Alexander fighting for it, not just because both men are #1 and #2 but because both men want to fight for the title aswell and Alexander is already mandatory and waiting for his shot.

This would but an end to Witter-McCloskey and Paul would end up facing Souleymane M'Baye for the European title which would be a very easy fight for Paul. That would put an end to McCloskey v Olusegun in the future aswell as Paul would probably be stripped for choosing to fight for the European title rather than defend his mandaory for the British title.

The BBBofC probably would of allowed McCloskey to fight for the European and defend his British title against Witter even though he's not mandatory on the condition that he'd fight Olusegun next. But of course M'Baye can't fight for the British title so they'd just straight out strip him.

With that said McCloskey would have no need for the British title with the European around his waist.

This is a dangerous principle being set by the WBC though, it seems as if they are trying to battle against unification, it'll backfire on them though, they try and force top fighters hands and they'll realise pretty quickly that the fighters and the fights that matter not sanctioning body titles who people barely care about anymore anyway.

walshb

Guys, how is Hatton anything?

He has no belt of worth and has fought four times in four years
at 140 lbs.

He is not recognised by any of the
four main bodies as the champ.

Hey, it might irk
some people, but he cannot live
on his past!

Just because RING have him as champion of their
"unofficial" list means damn all. Officially, the best
140 lb men are those who are the LEGIT
champs of the 4 main bodies.

Bradly, Kotelnik and Urango are the main men!

Hatton is purely and simply in it
for the big pay now and that excludes
him IMO from a claim to being the best.

He beats one or all of the title holders and I will
say he is the best or one of the best.

In my view he is rated behind these guys officially!

Big Ears

walshb wrote: »

Guys, how is Hatton anything?

He has no belt of worth and has fought four times in four years
at 140 lbs.

He is not recognised by any of the
four main bodies as the champ.

Hey, it might irk
some people, but he cannot live
on his past!

Just because RING have him as champion of their
"unofficial" list means damn all. Officially, the best
140 lb men are those who are the LEGIT
champs of the 4 main bodies.

Bradly, Kotelnik and Urango are the main men!

Hatton is purely and simply in it
for the big pay now and that excludes
him IMO from a claim to being the best.

He beats one or all of the title holders and I will
say he is the best or one of the best.

In my view he is rated behind these guys officially!

A man who puts his faith into that of the blind will be led blindly.

eagle eye

walshb wrote: »

Guys, how is Hatton anything?

He has no belt of worth and has fought four times in four years
at 140 lbs.

He is not recognised by any of the
four main bodies as the champ.

Hey, it might irk
some people, but he cannot live
on his past!

Just because RING have him as champion of their
"unofficial" list means damn all. Officially, the best
140 lb men are those who are the LEGIT
champs of the 4 main bodies.

Bradly, Kotelnik and Urango are the main men!

Hatton is purely and simply in it
for the big pay now and that excludes
him IMO from a claim to being the best.

He beats one or all of the title holders and I will
say he is the best or one of the best.

In my view he is rated behind these guys officially!

Jaysus, here you are questioning Hatton and on the other hand in another thread being delighted to see the most undeserving man ever to get a shot at a title at 140.

Sometimes I just have to wonder if you are legit Walshb.

Hatton is without doubt the best around at 140 based on results to date. Bradley for me has the skills to take the step up an give it a real go. The rest for me are not in the picture.

walshb

Eagle, being happy a man gets a shot and KNOWING the man doesn't deserve a shot are two different things. Can you see this?

Dunne didn't deserve his shot. I was happy he got it.
Khan doesn't deserve his shot. I am happy he got it.

Just because I am happy, doesn't mean I believe they
deserve it!

I'm with you guys and honestly, If I had to say
who would win a tournie' of the best 140 lb
men on the planet, then Hatton would be a betting
favorite. Still, we have to have some respect for the so
called champions and belt holders.

I have said before that I will draw the line of respect when
those organisations start creating watered down versions
of their world titles. That is takin' the piss!

As it stands, the 140 lb division has three champs and
Hatton is NOT one of them, despite what
the RING says.

He wants to be recognised
as a world champ, then go take one or all
of the main belts (WBA, WBC, IBF&WBO)

ODD-JOB

Ring magazine rating lost all credibility when they went under the ownership of a boxing promoter (golden boy).

Such a conflict of interests now exist , that one couldnt possibily take "RING" as an honest unbiased rating system.

eagle eye

walshb wrote: »

Eagle, being happy a man gets a shot and KNOWING the man doesn't deserve a shot are two different things. Can you see this?

Dunne didn't deserve his shot. I was happy he got it.
Khan doesn't deserve his shot. I am happy he got it.

Just because I am happy, doesn't mean I believe they
deserve it!

I'm with you guys and honestly, If I had to say
who would win a tournie' of the best 140 lb
men on the planet, then Hatton would be a betting
favorite. Still, we have to have some respect for the so
called champions and belt holders.

I have said before that I will draw the line of respect when
those organisations start creating watered down versions
of their world titles. That is takin' the piss!

As it stands, the 140 lb division has three champs and
Hatton is NOT one of them, despite what
the RING says.

He wants to be recognised
as a world champ, then go take one or all
of the main belts (WBA, WBC, IBF&WBO)

He has held all of them belts over the last few years. Nobody has ever beaten him at the weight so he is the undisputed World Champion at the weight.

walshb

Hey, Mike Tyson had all the belts too, is he still the undisputed champ now?
BTW, did Hatton ever hold the WBC belt?

Look, the fact is that NOW, he has ZERO belts. That is fact and we have
to accept that. You and I may think he's the best, but the facts say he
is NOT a world belt holder.

That's all I wanted to clarify

eagle eye

walshb wrote: »

Hey, Mike Tyson had all the belts too, is he still the undisputed champ now?
BTW, did Hatton ever hold the WBC belt?

Look, the fact is that NOW, he has ZERO belts. That is fact and we have
to accept that. You and I may think he's the best, but the facts say he
is NOT a world belt holder.

That's all I wanted to clarify

Now thats a silly argument. Hatton has not been beaten at the weight. He won all the belts.

Tyson lost all his belts in the ring.

Big Ears

Walsh within 10 years the IBO will probably make it a 'big 5', they are currently regarded similar to the WBO were in the early 90's and their fair ranking system along with having some very big names as champion mean that they're quickly becoming very recognised and very liked. It's only a matter of time and how will you see things then ?

At the minute you say they are 3 champions, yet you recognise 4 belts ?, so which 3 are champions ?

This is all stupid imo, it's impossible to have more than one actual World Champion at a weight, by having more than one then there isn't actually a 'World' Champion.

Hatton is the man who beat the man, that's the way it's always been.
The lineal championship of the World, just like it was in Jack Dempsey or Sugar Ray Robinson's day. Pacquiao becomes the Light-Welterweight champion of the World if he beats Hatton.


You know some of the national commissions/organisations had the right idea when they saw what was happening to boxing. The Japanese boxing council don't allow any World title fights other than WBA or WBC. They made an exception for Tyson twice(he was also defending his two other titles) but other than that no IBF fights are held in Japan and you will find no Japanese fighter even in the IBF's rankings(it's pointless as they won't fight for it).

The BBBofC refused to recognise and sanction WBO fights, but Frank Warren was adamant the Warren Boxing Organisation title be allowed in so he could pull the wool over fans eyes. Warren threatened to start his own British sanctioning body(in some countries you will find cases where there is more than one eg Argentina/Germany and formerly the Philippines). The BBBofC caved and Warren had his WBO fights sanctioned.

It's amazing to think people put faith in these organisations when one was proven legally to be corrupt(IBF), another to have legally broken their own rules(WBC) and would have gone bankrupt if not for the compassion of the boxer they victimised. The other two's rankings are often a joke, and the IBF strip belts off quicker than a showgirl in a burlesque house .
That's due to the IBF having to follow everyone of their rules to the book following their previous incident.

The WBA are creating 2/3 champions in every division.
The WBC are stopping people from unifying.
The WBO are in Sports Network and Universum's pocket, and Bob Arum and are definitely on the take.

Walshb I've no idea why you put any faith in these organisations.
I can get you World ranked in one of them if you'd like(and no I'm not kidding)
All it's going to take is about $50,000, an American visa, 15 fights against no hopers in Arkansas and me getting in touch with Stacy Goodson or Bobby Dobbs who will facilitate this with bringing in the no hopers and getting the bull**** regional titles of the WBC/WBA/WBO on the line to help along the way. It's that easy.

One World, one champion.

walshb

Eh, where did I ever say I thought we were in a perfect place regarding
the state of the divisions? Wasn't I one of few who
slated the WBA for attempting to have two
champs when others saw no problem?

They are a joke and are all over the place, but unfortunately, they do
count. That's all I am saying

The 3 champs are Bradley, Urango and Koletnik?

Am I incorrect here. Does Bradley not hold two
belts Big Ears?

Big Ears

walshb wrote: »

Eh, where did I ever say I thought we were in a perfect place regarding
the state of the divisions? Wasn't I one of few who
slated the WBA for attempting to have two
champs when others saw no problem?

They are a joke and are all over the place, but unfortunately, they do
count. That's all I am saying

The 3 champs are Bradley, Urango and Koletnik?

Am I incorrect here. Does Bradley not hold two
belts Big Ears?

In this division yes, but you stated(in general for all divisions), that you recognised 3 champions. Well there's 4 sanctioning bodies, so how does that work ?

Are you saying the lineal title doesn't count, that being the real champion is inferior to holding a sanctioning body title ?

walshb

Big Ears wrote: »

In this division yes, but you stated(in general for all divisions), that you recognised 3 champions. Well there's 4 sanctioning bodies, so how does that work ?

I think that is inaccurate mate. Though it pains me, I do
recognise the 4 main bodies. In many other posts
I have listed the 4 bodies.

From post #15:

"As it stands, the 140 lb division has three champs and
Hatton is NOT one of them, despite what
the RING says.

He wants to be recognised
as a world champ, then go take one or all
of the main belts (WBA, WBC, IBF&WBO)"

I clearly have listed 4 divisions here. I do believe like
you, that there should be ONE in all divisions; but we
know that is no longer the case.

The real champion? That's not a science or a fact?
The RING recognise who they feel should be
the real champ, but that is only a matter of opinion.
It's not fact or definite

Hey, how long can Israel Vasquez for example, remain idle and still
be seen as the real champ? We have to have some criteria and
the official criteria is the 4 bodies, bad and all as it is!

I do believe the RING used to say that the champ
can only lose the title in the ring or if he retires
or moves to another weight. That sounds good, but
there are implications. Rules have to be abided by also

So, a fighter sustains a long and difficult injury, do we wait
forever until he is okay to fight? That's not right really!

That is the reasoning behind the RING lineal champ in general

Big Ears

walshb wrote: »

I think that is inaccurate mate. Though it pains me, I do
recognise the 4 main bodies. In many other posts
I have listed the 4 bodies.


"As it stands, the 140 lb division has three champs and
Hatton is NOT one of them, despite what
the RING says.

He wants to be recognised
as a world champ, then go take one or all
of the main belts (WBA, WBC, IBF&WBO)"

I clearly have listed 4 divisions here. I do believe like
you, that there should be ONE in all divisions; but we
know that is no longer the case.

The real champion? That's not a science or a fact?
The RING recognise who they feel should be
the real champ, but that is only a matter of opinion.
It's not fact or definite

Hey, how long can Israel Vasquez for example, remain idle and still
be seen as the real champ? We have to have some criteria and
the official criteria is the 4 bodies, bad and all as it is!

I do believe the RING used to say that the champ
can only lose the title in the ring or if he retires
or moves to another weight. That sounds good, but
there are implications. Rules have to be abided by also

So when the IBO becomes recognised as being of the same level as the rest(and as I said it's only a matter of time), then we can have 5 World Champions in every weight division , of course the WBA will have 2 more but we can ignore those.

I mean you say the only official criteria we have is the 4 sanctioning bodies, however there are many more 'World' sanctioning bodies than that(over 40 I believe). So public perception is still coming into it, we use this perception to accept which of these bodies create World champions and which don't. That's not not any different from using our own perspective of who the champion actually is.

The IBO will become #5, so what happens if one of the other minor organisations gets their act together. Maybe the WBF become what the IBO is now, and the WBO was 15 years ago, and they become part of the 'big 6'.

personally I'd love that because 6 for me is probably the number when people stop caring what the sanctioning orgs say or do.

walshb

For the record: I walshb will not recognise EVER, another
body claiming to be a world body. 3 is bad, 4 is worse and any more
is downright farcical!

Hey, the WBU has been around a bit, so with the IBO, that's
your neat 6!

BTW, Big, you never acknowledged your false
claim pertaining to my belt acknowledgement;)

Big Ears

walshb wrote: »

For the record: I walshb will not recognise EVER, another
body claiming to be a world body. 3 is bad, 4 is worse and any more
is downright farcical!

Hey, the WBU has been around a bit, so with the IBO, that's
your neat 6!

BTW, Big, you never acknowledged your false
claim pertaining to my belt acknowledgement;)

Everyone else will see the IBO as being up there with the rest, what you think won't matter then.

The WBU will never be an organisation that breaks forward, it doesn't have the system. It's just a puppet organisation for Frank Warren, but in the past they did actually have some decent fighters as champions and fighters outside America too. It would have to be taken over by someone else to change. But the IBO, they're on their way. They're actually better run than the other 4 at the moment which is probably why they've a growing reputation.

Which false claim ?, on another thread you said you recognise 3 World Champions, yet you recognise 4 sanctioning bodies. That leaves us with a bit of a situation doesn't it ?[I will admit that I originally forgot that Bradley now holds two belts but the point is still valid]

You never got back to me on my plan for you becoming a World ranked fighter, I'm not joking that is physically possible to achieve.
It's a similar pattern to how these fighters got ranked:

http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=164099&cat=boxer
He was top 15 with the WBC but has now fallen all the way to #22, amazingly that's due to inactivity not the fact that he's never fought anyone inside the top 250 in the World. He's got two draws with awful journeymen and a Split decision win(apparently a gift) over Billy Zumbrun.

Or how about the WBA giving this man a World ranking http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=30638&cat=boxer
A 43 year old Super-Bantamweight is really special, and at that age getting a World ranking when you've been retired for 2 years(having presumely never been World ranked before) and in your 2 comeback fights you've beaten a 0-12 fighter and a 0-13-1 fighter. Now that is special.

What about Bobby Gunn, a Welterweight who retired in 1993 and decided to come back in 2004 as a Cruiserweight. 2 1/2 years later he's challenging Enzo Maccarinelli for a World title. I say challenging in the loosest sense.
He had had 5 fights since his comeback, 2 over fighters with winning records, neither of those two fighters were even good club fighters. They're the type of journeymen, who you feed to better journeymen, who you feed to better journeymen, who you feed to better journeymen, who you feed to gatekeepers, who you feed to contenders, who you feed to champions.
Yet he still got himself a beautiful WBO #15 ranking, but then again that's Warrenf or you.......or is it ? A lot of people complain about the WBO and their ranking of Bobby Gunn but at the same time the WBC had him #14.

Don't worry though, Bobby Gunn(www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=287895&cat=boxer) has proven himself since, he's gotten a draw with Cory Phelps who our own Middleweight Joe Rea stopped in 2 rounds. Checking the WBC rankings Bobby really is back, he's slipped into the top 15 again(only at #15), so I hope we can expect another title challenge soon.

JD Chapman must be a good fighter, http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=152786&cat=boxer he was ranked by 2(WBC and WBA) and possibly a 3rd sanctioning body at one point, not just at #15 either. One had him #9th and another #13. They of course fail to recognise that Chapman is actually **** but I suppose that's irrelevant.

Or how about current WBC #14 Evans Quinn http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=268047&cat=boxer even though he's a Cruiserweight and never beat anyone I'm sure he deserves his spot.

They also had Tomasz Bonin at #11(the guy Haye blasted out in one round)
The WBC aren't all bad though, they were nice enough to give Jameel McCline a title eliminator after losing 3 fights in a row

Actually this has become a rant now more than anything else, think I might start a new thread and cut some of this post into it.

eagle eye

Walshb, have you ever looked at the ring champions?

They don't have a Champion at each weight. Right now they have Calderon at 108, Vazquez at 122, Marquez at 135, Hatton at 140, Pavilik at 160 and Adamek at Cruiserweight.

Thats six champions out of all the divisions. In fairness they don't give out the title lightly.

Their top five pound for pound are Pacquiao, Marquez, Hopkins, Vazquez and Mosley. Only one of them is a ring champion so its not like they throw the titles around willy nilly.

Like think about it, even Manny does not have a title.

Heres a link to it if you want to read up on it. http://www.ringtv.com/ratings/pound_for_pound/

walshb

My issue is not that the RING don't have good or accurate views, they do. Pac is probably the best fighter on the planet. I simply think that their methods at times are open to criticism and are flawed. Some hold them far too high in the esteem ratings.

Look at Vasquez for example. When will they decide that enough is enough.
The chap may never fight again, though, June or July is rumored to be a comeback fight; but he's been idle for over a year now.

I don't agree with them still rating these guys. What if a fighter gets sent down for a year or two, should he stil be rated? I bet the RING would still
rate him.

Big, you are a fierce critic of the alphabet belts yet you say,

"Everyone else will see the IBO as being up there with the rest, what you think won't matter then."

So, what is it? I won't regard them, will you? I will refuse to even see them!

Also, maybe once or twice I have said I only recognise 3 champs, but I have always maintained that the WBO gets my begrudged approval. That is 4.

Even though it should be ONE. We can all have our view of the four of who
we think is number 1, but it's not definite

walshb

eagle eye wrote: »

Walshb, have you ever looked at the ring champions?

They don't have a Champion at each weight. Right now they have Calderon at 108, Vazquez at 122, Marquez at 135, Hatton at 140, Pavilik at 160 and Adamek at Cruiserweight.

Thats six champions out of all the divisions. In fairness they don't give out the title lightly.

Their top five pound for pound are Pacquiao, Marquez, Hopkins, Vazquez and Mosley. Only one of them is a ring champion so its not like they throw the titles around willy nilly.

Like think about it, even Manny does not have a title.

Heres a link to it if you want to read up on it. http://www.ringtv.com/ratings/pound_for_pound/

Eagle, thanks for the link; I have seen it before and agree with parts of it.
I just don't consider it the be all and end all!

Big Ears

walshb wrote: »

"Everyone else will see the IBO as being up there with the rest, what you think won't matter then."

So, what is it? I won't regard them, will you? I will refuse to even see them!

I won't, but no one cares what I think now anyway :P, even most people who put their faith in believing in lineal champions like myself still put too much emphasis on the alphabet titles.

So if the IBO in the future is better run than the other organisations, less corrupt/not corrupt, has all the best fighters fighting for their titles, with the popularity of the other 4 titles seriously waned and the IBO seen by most to be the best of the big 5, and the most desired belt to be won by the fighters.

Toy still wouldn't recognise it ?

Even if one of the other organisations went bankrupt(like what should have happened to the WBC early this century) ?

walshb

One example that I am sure most would say is off, was the RING
seeing McGuigan as the lineal champ when he won the title in
1985. Pedroza was the former lineal champ, but Nelson held the WBC
belt and most would rate Nelson superior to Barry, me included!

Okay, a case could be made for Eusebio in his heyday being the lineal champ
ahead of Azumah, but when Barry then took the title, surely Nelson's claim
was more worthy?

And surely more worthy than Stevie Cruz?

The RING isn't gospel!

Big Ears

walshb wrote: »

One example that I am sure most would say is off, was the RING
seeing McGuigan as the lineal champ when he won the title in
1985. Pedroza was the former lineal champ, but Nelson held the WBC
belt and most would rate Nelson superior to Barry, me included!

Okay, a case could be made for Eusebio in his heyday being the lineal champ
ahead of Azumah, but when Barry then took the title, surely Nelson's claim
was more worthy?

And surely more worthy than Stevie Cruz?

The RING isn't gospel!

Barry included actually, he's recently admitted he felt Azumah would of been too much for him.
However you don't like the system of beat the man to be the man ?

I remember Pedroza was seen as the man but can't remember if he was actually lineal. The Ring magazine don't necessarily have the lineal champion as champ and The Ring do have plenty of flaws.

But what would you like to see an organisation do in that situation, strip McGuigan and give the title to Nelson(the apparently better fighter) ?

walshb

Big Ears wrote: »

Barry included actually, he's recently admitted he felt Azumah would of been too much for him.
However you don't like the system of beat the man to be the man ?

I remember Pedroza was seen as the man but can't remember if he was actually lineal. The Ring magazine don't necessarily have the lineal champion as champ and The Ring do have plenty of flaws.

But what would you like to see an organisation do in that situation, strip McGuigan and give the title to Nelson(the apparently better fighter) ?

My point in using this example is that Barry lost the title to a guy who was a replacement opponent and a guy who is NOT in Nelson's league.

Yes, the man who beat the man is great, but at times, it is also flawed.
What happens when the man who beat the man is pretty ordinary
and circumstances lead to his win?

The RING prides itself on installing the 'best' as lineal champ.
It doesn't always do this according to many and the Cruz
example is just ONE example of a flawed system.

Eusebio was lineal champ and like I said, an argument could definitely
be made for a fighter of Eusebio's pedigree, even over Nelson.

But then Barry beat an aged Pedroza and the RING automatically install
Barry as the lineal champ using the potentially flawed criteria whereby
the champ can lose the RING title in the RING, and the man who beat the man! But just because he loses
the title, should not AUTOMATICALLY promote the victor to
the lineal champ!

Going by the RING, you could have the great Vasquez losing his title against
a voluntary fighter by fluke, KO shot or injury and the RING then
automatically install the voluntary winner as the lineal champ no matter
how good he really is? That is flawed! What about the other greats like Lopez?

Should he not be considered?

walshb

Big Ears wrote: »

The Ring magazine don't necessarily have the lineal champion as champ and The Ring do have plenty of flaws.

Big, the whole 'lineal' is the RING champ. They are two of the same, just worded like so.
The lineal champ is the "TRUE" champ in the division. The RING like others have their
own version of their lineal champs

This is a definition of lineal and the RING apply this when they select their RING champions!

The whole concept of 'lineal' is the man who beat the man!

"Another criticism of the lineal championship is that a fighter may defend it against inferior opponents. For example, George Foreman was considered lineal champion from 1994 till 1997, when Shannon Briggs beat him. After the WBA and IBF stripped him of their titles in 1994, he fought only two minor opponents before Briggs.[2] The lineal champion is not necessarily the boxer viewed as the best."

Here is one criticism above that I agree with

walshb

Here is another piece of info that leads to debate:

"If a lineal champion is not recognized by sanctioning bodies nor by the boxing public, he should not be recognized as a real champion. His anonymity as a a champion prevents top contenders from seeking him out as an opponent. Instead they will pursue bouts with recognized titlists or top contenders, in the hopes of securing a recognized championship. In order to be the champion, people must know you are the champion."

Now, this leads to utter confusion. Hatton by this criteria, and it is lineal criteria, is not the
"TRUE" or "REAL" champ, unless you or others want to really try to say that
the IBO is legitimate?

Now, the words, not recognised by sanctioning bodies, can we assume this means not recognised
as a champion in any of these bodies?

Big Ears

There is a difference between being the best fighter in the division and being the Champion. Often both are the same person but just because there's a better fighter out there does not mean that when the true champion is beaten, his victor is champion(which is essentially what the man who beat the man means).

I mean when Ingemar Johannsson knocked out Floyd Patterson do you think people went and proclaimed Sonny Liston or another contender as the champion ?, of course they didn't. Johansson wasn't the best heavyweight in the World, but he had beaten the man who was the champion, the lineal champion and as such he became the lineal champion.

Although the Ring use a sort of lineal system there are differences between them and the actual lineal title. Otherwise Zsolt Erdei wouldn't be lineal champion now(The Ring's last lineal champ was Calzaghe), and Vitali Klitschko would never have been Ring Champion(which he was after beating Sanders although he was never lineal champion).

Yes a lineal system can lead to weak defences and poor(although rarely) champions. But is it really better to have 5 champions and even poorer champions with even poorer contenders ?, is that the answer ?

Of course it isn't, there has always been claimants of being World champion and organisations NYSAC, NBA, BBBofC who recognising World Champions but within time one man would establish himself as champion and after that was done no matter what those organisations did the man established as champion in everyone's view was champion and he had to be either beaten, retire, or move up in weight for that to change. I can't understand why people would prefer the new system(of over 40 World titles) which has been built around ppv tv and conning the public over the old way.

There's always been dispute over World Champions, just in the old days when that dispute was settled they didn't carry it on for needless reasons.
If the WBA stripped Kotelnik tomorrow, and picked two destitute men off the street with no boxing experience to fight for their title would you recognise the winner as above Hatton, 'like they deserve' ?

walshb

The answer is not to have 5 champs, but to have one. The point I am
making is that the lineal is flawed, it may still be the best
of a bad lot, but it's far from perfect and there are
countless examples to prove it.

The RING use lineal as their main criteria; it is flawed and hence, the RING
champs will not always be the best, as you and I have noted!

Currently, I believe the RING have Cal as the LH lineal champ.
Okay, he is lineal champ, but IMO, he has not proved to be the best.

Actually, the LH title is vacant in RING!

It's a good topic of discussion all the same!

Big Ears

walshb wrote: »

The answer is not to have 5 champs, but to have one. The point I am
making is that the lineal is flawed, it may still be the best
of a bad lot, but it's far from perfect and there are
countless examples to prove it.

The RING use lineal as their main criteria; it is flawed and hence, the RING
champs will not always be the best, as you and I have noted!

Currently, I believe the RING have Cal as the LH lineal champ.
Okay, he is lineal champ, but IMO, he has not proved to be the best.

Actually, the LH title is vacant in RING!

It's a good topic of discussion all the same!

Calzaghe is retired hence he's not Ring champion at the weight anymore.
He wasn't actually lineal champ as I said either, Erdei was and Ring magazine would probably tell you themselves if you wrote to them, that had they been awarding belts during the mid 90's and onwards(they stopped awarding titles for a period of about 15 years) that Erdei would be their champion now. But they don't retrospectively award titles so he isn't.

walshb

When Cal beat HOP, RING Had him as their champ!

Being retired, now he is NOT and the title is vacant, yet others
have Erdei as lineal and RING only rate him #4 or #5?

It's a mess!

Now, you seem to think there is a slight difference between
lineal and RING, well, maybe there is, but RING use lineal criteria!

Big Ears

walshb wrote: »

When Cal beat HOP, RING Had him as their champ!

Being retired, now he is NOT and the title is vacant, yet others
have Erdei as lineal and RING only rate him #4 or #5?

It's a mess!

Now, you seem to think there is a slight difference between
lineal and RING, well, maybe there is, but RING use lineal criteria!

That's what I've been saying.

Henry Maske and Viril Hill fought back in 1996. The Lineal title was vacant and they were the accepted #1 and #2 in the Light-heavyweight division. Hill won and became lineal champ, Michalczewski beat Hill, Gonzalez beat him and Erdei beat Gonzalez. Making Erdei the actual lineal champ.
The Ring starting giving out belts again some point during Jones' period of picking up every belt in sight(bar the WBO), and as far as I'm aware they just named him champ without him beating the #2 or #3 in the division as their rules state. They later mentioned in an issue of their magazine that the reason Erdei(or Gonzalez may have been champ at the time), wasn't their champion is simply because they weren't giving out belts during the period of the Hill v Maske fight and that they wouldn't act retrospectively.
This suited the Ring, it was better for them to have an American champion to sell as the real champion than a Hungarian fighting out of Germany who was never going to fight in America or be seen by the vast majority of the Ring's readers.

I'm well aware that the Ring work on a lineal system, but aren't the same as the lineal title.

me wrote: »

Although the Ring use a sort of lineal system there are differences between them and the actual lineal title.

2 posts ago

You're right though it's an interesting discussion, and will become even more a topic discussion in boxing when as I mentioned the IBO become 'accepted'.

walshb

The Jones and Michalczewski sham was well documented and RING
where IMO quite biased with Jones, for reasons you intimated.

Jones was accussed of ducking Michalczewski if I remember correctly.

Big Ears

walshb wrote: »

The Jones and Michalczewski sham was well documented and RING
where IMO quite biased with Jones, for reasons you intimated.

Jones was accussed of ducking Michalczewski if I remember correctly.

To be fair it was more of a Ottke-Calzaghe situation. Both men would of had no problem fighting the other, but their camps would only take the fight if they could get it at home. Hence it never happened.

What the Ring did was bad enough, how the WBC treated Graciano Rocchigiani was disgraceful and I can't believe they were lucky enough that he showed them mercy when he could have buried them.

For those not aware of it here's boxrecs short explanation:

111-118
113-115
116-113

(Before this bout, then-WBC Light Heavyweight champion Roy Jones made his intentions to fight Heavyweight James 'Buster' Douglas on May 20, 1998 instead of Michael Nunn, the WBC mandated challenger. The WBC title was then declared vacant and contested between #1 rated Nunn and #2 rated Graciano Rocchigiani. However, in June of 1998 the WBC illegally down-graded Rocchigiani's classification to that of an 'interim' champion, and then stripped him outright, having declared Roy Jones as being the champion in recess.
Rocchigiani sued the WBC and was awarded $31 million in damages. Also as a result of this lawsuit, a United States District Judge retroactively restored Rocchigiani’s official WBC Light Heavyweight championship status in April 2003, but only from 03-28-1998 to 04-15-2000, when he lost to Dariusz Michalczewski.)

The WBC also did this in Jones' fight with McCallum:
Because of a dispute with the WBC, the Florida Boxing Commission appointed all three judges. WBC President, Jose Sulaiman appointed three other judges to score the fight sitting in the first row of the working press section. They all also had Jones as the winner, but by scores of 116-111, 117-110 and 119-108.


Another awful thing the WBC have done, and which that clown Sulaiman came out last year and admitted they had made a 'mistake' doing was the Jorge Arce and Pongsaklek Wonjongkam situation.

January 2005-Wonjongkam defends his WBC Flyweight title and waits for the eliminator for his title between Jorge Arce and Hussein Hussein to decide his next mandatory.

March 2005-Arce stop Hussein Hussein in a 10 round thriller to become mandatory for the WBC Flyweight title

April 2005- Wonjongkam wins in non-title fight

July 2005- on the 29th Wonjongkam wins another non-title fight and the very next day Jorge Arce wins a fight for the interim WBC Flyweight title. No explanation is given, the Thai is obviously not injured and there appears no reason for an interim belt.

October 2005-Jorge Arce defends his interim WBC Flyweight belt, 2 days later Pongsaklek Wongjongkam defends his WBC Flyweight title.

December 2005- Jorge Arce defends his interim WBC Flyweight title, a week later Wonjongkam wins a non-title fight.

January 2006- Jorge Arce defends his interim WBC Flyweight title

February 2006- Pongsaklek Wongjongkam defends his WBC Flyweight title

April 2006- Jorge Arce defends his WBC interim Flyweight title

May 2006- Pongsaklek Wonjongkam defends his WBC Flyweight title

June 2006- Wongjongkam defends his WBC Flyweight title.

September 2006- Jorge Arce unable to force a fight with Pongsaklek Wonjongkam and struggling now to make Flyweight moves up to Super-Flyweight where he fights a title WBC eliminator. He would fight another eliminator before eventually getting a shot at the WBC Super-Flyweight title in April of 2007.

November 2006- Pongsaklek Wonjongkam makes the first mandatory defense of his title since he beat Hussein Hussein 3 years previously. Arce fought one mandatory in the time he was champion, also against Hussein.


After winning his title eliminator in 2005 to become the mandatory contender, Jorge Arce won 5 interim title fights back to back without ever getting a shot at the Thai fighter.
In the period between Arce winning that eliminator and him moving up in weight Wonjongkam had 7 fights, 4 of those were defences of his title.

Now some might say that the WBA have up to 3 champions now including interim champions sometimes when there is no injured fighter.
This is true, but it was the WBC(as far as I'm aware) who were the first to mandate an interim champion with no apparent(even flimsy) reason, and this was where they set that precedent. Also the WBA would of eventually mandated their interim champion to fight the full champion. The WBC had no plans for doing so and were hoping the two camps would eventually come to an agreement between each other to fight, but if they could not they would not force it. Both Arce and Wonjongkam were good earners for them, and that's the way they wanted to keep it.

To go 3 years without a mandatory is also insane, especially when you still actually sanction eliminators !

Anyway as I said I think I might start a thread with all the flaws of the sanctioning bodies and move some of my posts(or part of them) to there from here. I've really hijacked this thread.

Edit: lol just checked boxrec and guess who's fighting for the vacant WBC interim title ?, yep no other than our Thai friend Pongsaklek Wonjongkam.
It's on in 2 weeks and seems very odd considering as the champion defended his title only 4 months ago and as far as I'm aware isn't injured.
Sulaiman said they made a mistake last time.........would he mind learning from it ?

In truth for him it's not a mistake, it's smart business practice, because that's how he seems his organisation. Not as a body to sanction athletic competition in the form of pugilism but to create as big a profit for himself and the company as possible.

sligobhoy67

Big Ears wrote: »

Walsh within 10 years the IBO will probably make it a 'big 5', they are currently regarded similar to the WBO were in the early 90's and their fair ranking system along with having some very big names as champion mean that they're quickly becoming very recognised and very liked. It's only a matter of time and how will you see things then ?

At the minute you say they are 3 champions, yet you recognise 4 belts ?, so which 3 are champions ?

This is all stupid imo, it's impossible to have more than one actual World Champion at a weight, by having more than one then there isn't actually a 'World' Champion.

Hatton is the man who beat the man, that's the way it's always been.
The lineal championship of the World, just like it was in Jack Dempsey or Sugar Ray Robinson's day. Pacquiao becomes the Light-Welterweight champion of the World if he beats Hatton.


You know some of the national commissions/organisations had the right idea when they saw what was happening to boxing. The Japanese boxing council don't allow any World title fights other than WBA or WBC. They made an exception for Tyson twice(he was also defending his two other titles) but other than that no IBF fights are held in Japan and you will find no Japanese fighter even in the IBF's rankings(it's pointless as they won't fight for it).

The BBBofC refused to recognise and sanction WBO fights, but Frank Warren was adamant the Warren Boxing Organisation title be allowed in so he could pull the wool over fans eyes. Warren threatened to start his own British sanctioning body(in some countries you will find cases where there is more than one eg Argentina/Germany and formerly the Philippines). The BBBofC caved and Warren had his WBO fights sanctioned.

It's amazing to think people put faith in these organisations when one was proven legally to be corrupt(IBF), another to have legally broken their own rules(WBC) and would have gone bankrupt if not for the compassion of the boxer they victimised. The other two's rankings are often a joke, and the IBF strip belts off quicker than a showgirl in a burlesque house .
That's due to the IBF having to follow everyone of their rules to the book following their previous incident.

The WBA are creating 2/3 champions in every division.
The WBC are stopping people from unifying.
The WBO are in Sports Network and Universum's pocket, and Bob Arum and are definitely on the take.

Walshb I've no idea why you put any faith in these organisations.
I can get you World ranked in one of them if you'd like(and no I'm not kidding)
All it's going to take is about $50,000, an American visa, 15 fights against no hopers in Arkansas and me getting in touch with Stacy Goodson or Bobby Dobbs who will facilitate this with bringing in the no hopers and getting the bull**** regional titles of the WBC/WBA/WBO on the line to help along the way. It's that easy.

One World, one champion.

Two words - Mattew, Hatton.

Big Ears

sligobhoy67 wrote: »

Two words - Mattew, Hatton.

I'm aware he fought an IBO eliminator with Ted Bami if that's what you're referring to. But I'm not the one supporting the IBO and in truth one fighter considered of a poor standard won't be enough to stop its progress.

Heavyweight: Wladamir Klitschko is their Heavyweight champion, before that it was Lennox Lewis. Wlad makes his 7th defence v Haye.

Cruiserweight: Jonathon Banks was their champion, before that Tomasz Adamek, funnily enough Adamek didn't bother paying the sanctioning fee for the IBO title in the fight between them and it was only on the line for Banks.
Carl Thompson is a former champion.

Light-Heavyweight: Chad Dawson is their champion, before that Antonio Tarver, Bernard Hopkins, Glen Johnson and Roy Jones.

Super-Middleweight: Sakio Bika is the champion with Jeff Lacy and Robin Reid as former champions.

Middleweight: Daniele Geale is the champion and will defend it in a major all Aussie clash with Anthony Mundine. Raymond Joval held the belt for a long time, and has been its main holder.

Light-Middleweight:Attila Kovacs last held the belt, formerly held by Sergio Martinez.

Welterweight: Isaac Hlatshwayo held the belt until a year ago and presumely no longer does as he didn't defend it in his IBF eliminator 5 months ago.
Floyd Mayweather jnr is a former holder of the title.

Light-Welterweight: Ricky Hatton is the champion and makes his 4th defence against Manny Pacquiao. Stevie Johnston is a former champion.

Lightweight: Last champion was Juan Diaz, he paid the sanctioning fees for the fight against Marquez but Marquez didn't and as such the title will presumely become vacant(like the Adamek v Banks case). Isaac Hlatshwayo is a fomrer champion.

Super-Feather: Zolani Marali is champion, Cassius Baloyi is a former champion.

Featherweight:Fernando Beltran was champion but seems to have dropped the belt a few months ago.Former champions include Naseem Hamed, Marco Antonio Barrera, Vuyani Bungu, Junior Jones, Derrick Gainer, Michael Brodie and Cristobal Cruz.

Super-Bantamweight: Mike Oliver was the last champion, Paulie Ayala is a former champion.

Bantamweight:Silence Mabuza was the last champion, Rafael Marquez and Johnny Bredahl are former champions.

Super-Flyweight:Zolile Mbityi is champion, Vic Darchinyan, Damaen kelly and Mauricio Pastrana are former champs.

Flyweight: Nonito Donaire is current champion, Vic Darchinyan and Damaen kelly are former champs.

Light-Flyweight:Haven't had a champion in 6 years and have no strong names as previous champion.

Minimumweight:Nkosinathi Joyi is champion.


So as you can see not only do they have some very strong current champions, Wlad, Dawson, Hatton, Donaire but also have some history with previous strong champions. The only thing is they have more strong fighters as champions now then any time in the past(although they've had some very strong champions for the past few years). They do seem to have some problems at the moment in that any fighter challenging for an IBF belt or eliminator seems to be giving up the belt which may hinder the IBO but will probably only be a major setback.

With such strong champions right now they aren't just going to fade away and they've already started the process which will keep them at the top. Eliminators, so although you've mocked Matthew Hatton fighting an IBO eliminator(and to be fair he did stop a former European champion to win that one) eliminators are a process which will have fighters fighting for the IBO belt more regularly. They don't impose mandatories but eliminators will mean that their titles won't be vacant for long and even though 'lesser' fighters will have to make up the numbers sometimes, eliminators will ensure a better standard of lesser fighter.

The IBO title is now often sought after by fighters who see it as a gateway to the bigger titles. This is exactly how the WBO title was thought of some time ago.

The IBO rules on defences may appeal to some fighters aswell, where if you're rated in the top 10 of the division while your champion you don't have to make any defences against a specific mandatory you merely have to:

Subject to the approval of the International Boxing Organization and within each NINE (9) month period after winning the Title, the World Champion may defend his Title:

1.) against any opponent selected from the list of thirty-five (35) highest ranked boxers in his category of weight or division, or,

2.) against any opponent between numbers 36-50, provided they meet all of the following additional criteria:

1. the challenger must not have lost his last contest.
2. the challenger must not have lost two of his last four fights by knock out or stoppage.
3. the challenger must have a positive record in his last six fights (e.g. 4-2, 3-2-1 or better).
4. the challenger must have boxed and won at least one contest of a minimum of 10 rounds duration.

walshb

The day Matthew Hatton is viewed as a force or a 'world champion,'
is the day I hang up my gloves with the sport

Big Ears

walshb wrote: »

The day Matthew Hatton is viewed as a force or a 'world champion,'
is the day I hang up my gloves with the sport

Ah don't worry the BBBofC have mandated him to fight Michael Jennings in a British title eliminator and Jennings would make easy work of him.

There is bad news though.............like Frank Warren would actually negotiate with a Hatton fighter now

Warren's gonna get Jennings a European title shot(he's already beaten the champion), **** around with him for a bit and then hope he's a bit shot by the time he matches him with his British champion Kell Brook.

Matthew Hatton does get more stick than he deserves though, he's not a bad fighter at domestic British level and has proven himself to be better than most expect with wins over a shot Ben Tackie and Ted Bami. I fancied him in both fights but by winning them he's proven himself considerably better than most thought. At the very least he's gonna have to beat another decent fighter(and of a higher calibre than those two fighters) to win an IBO title though. Sure he'd be awful if you actually thought of him as a World champion, but he'd be better than most WBU champions if he achieved that.

For a while they were thinking of putting him in against Judah on the Hatton-Pac undercard, and tbh I don't think most people would of minded him winning the IBO title if he could beat Judah.

akindoc

Big Ears wrote: »

Ah don't worry the BBBofC have mandated him to fight Michael Jennings in a British title eliminator and Jennings would make easy work of him.

There is bad news though.............like Frank Warren would actually negotiate with a Hatton fighter now

Warren's gonna get Jennings a European title shot(he's already beaten the champion), **** around with him for a bit and then hope he's a bit shot by the time he matches him with his British champion Kell Brook.

Matthew Hatton does get more stick than he deserves though, he's not a bad fighter at domestic British level and has proven himself to be better than most expect with wins over a shot Ben Tackie and Ted Bami. I fancied him in both fights but by winning them he's proven himself considerably better than most thought. At the very least he's gonna have to beat another decent fighter(and of a higher calibre than those two fighters) to win an IBO title though. Sure he'd be awful if you actually thought of him as a World champion, but he'd be better than most WBU champions if he achieved that.

For a while they were thinking of putting him in against Judah on the Hatton-Pac undercard, and tbh I don't think most people would of minded him winning the IBO title if he could beat Judah.

No way Matthew Hatton could beat Zab Judah. I'd be surprised to see him last 3 minutes.

Big Ears

akindoc wrote: »

No way Matthew Hatton could beat Zab Judah. I'd be surprised to see him last 3 minutes.

I'm well aware he couldn't beat Judah, just said that I didn't think people would minding him having his hands on the IBO belt if he could do so.

While I doubt that Judah would blast him away in a round, it would be a one sided fight. Judah hasn't been as impressive of late and at Welterweight hasn't been the same huge puncher he was at the weight below. I'd expect Judah to get a late stoppage(about round 10) after punishing M.Hatton for all of the previous 9 rounds, with some potential 10-8 rounds without knockdowns in there.

Matthew is a much improved fighter now though, as I said he's not that bad at domestic British Welterweight level. He used to be ****ing terrible.

joepenguin

Matthew Hatton seems to be improving bit by bit, he seems to be doing well with his new training set up. Id like to see him having a crack at the British title later in the year or if promotional issues got in the way then a wbu or ibo title shot.

Anywho, what next for Holt?

Big Ears

joepenguin wrote: »

Matthew Hatton seems to be improving bit by bit, he seems to be doing well with his new training set up. Id like to see him having a crack at the British title later in the year or if promotional issues got in the way then a wbu or ibo title shot.

Anywho, what next for Holt?

Holt will have a real gimme fight next, nothing competitive.
They'll just want to get him back to winning ways.
To be honest I'd try get a sports psychologist or someone like that to work with him(if they don't already) he's got all the tools but doesn't seem to have the focus and desire to use them to his best ability.
He's actually a very talented fighter, who's only fault should be a slightly questionable chin but instead it's these mental factors that really hold him back.

sligobhoy67

joepenguin wrote: »

Matthew Hatton seems to be improving bit by bit, he seems to be doing well with his new training set up. Id like to see him having a crack at the British title later in the year or if promotional issues got in the way then a wbu or ibo title shot.

Anywho, what next for Holt?

Did you see Craig Watson lose on ITV4 this weekend - well I saw Watson dominant Hatton last year. No one can tell me that Matthews shot at a IBO title would be anything less then a sop to keep Wicky happy with his version!