Boxing Forum - Boxing Discussion Forums banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
1,996 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The Ring Magazine has earned itself the nickname, "The Bible of Boxing". Some of you may or may not disagree with that.

I'd like you guys to use this thread to discuss and critique The Ring magazine.

-The U.S.A. has the most recognized champions according to the ring. Is this fair?
-The U.S.A. holds the most fighters in it's P4P list, is this well earned?
-Nate Cambell is listed as number two in his divison after Joel Casamayor, even after beating fellow American, Juan Diaz. Is this right?
-Bernard Hopkins and Ricky Hatton for example, do not hold any World Titles. Is it just to keep them as the "recognized" champions of their divisions?
-Should their be only one champion per division? Should we eliminate all other alphabet titles?

How would you guys manage boxing in a whole? I personally respect The Ring Magazine as a powerfull reference in boxing because of their tremendous inpact on the sport, but not as fact. I know I'm not alone in the matter, but I wouldn't call it "The Bible of Boxing". I think it's ok to disagree with it. Especially with their P4P rankings.

Please, explain your answers. Talk about what you want.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,212 Posts
1. Well it doesnt really matters and honestly i dont care if the most recognized champs were fom Latvia aslong as they were great and entertaining fighters.

2. Yeah i guess so, i dont see anyone touching the u.s.a exept maby Mexico with Britain coming after them.

3. No thats not right Juan was clearly the best fighter in the division and Nate beat him so he should be nr.1

4. I agree with both, they are both the guy to beat in theire division.

5. It should but it will never happen.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
I like RING mag. , its the best magazine covering boxing. As far as their rankings i agree most of the time , i dont always agree with thembut for the most part they do a great job. I do think we should get rid of some of those titles it seems like everybody got a belt. I personally have no problem with Casa being rated above Nate Campbell.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
25,712 Posts
The ring champ is the man who beat the man, thats the way boxing should be.

Casamayor gained the ring title after his win over chico at 135, chico gained it after his win over Castillo.

The ring has one champion and one champion only and that is the man who beat the man.

If there is no ring champion in a division then its decided when the #1 guy fights either the #2 or #3 guy. that is what boxing is all about, not the all these jokers laying claim to the WBZ's.

Regarding Hopkins, he is the linear champion. He took the title from Tarver who had taken it from Jones.

Hatton took the linear title at 140 from Kostya and has remained unbeaten there since.

TO BE THE MAN YOU HAVE TO BEAT THE MAN, THAT IS WHAT BOXING IS ALL ABOUT IT AINT IT?

The ring title is the best thing that has ever happened to boxing!
 

· Team Mayweather
Joined
·
24,378 Posts
I agree sometimes, not always. Even though sometimes a man beats the man, he may get old and fight bums just to hold on to his title. IN that time someone comes along who is definently the better man even though they havent fought.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
25,712 Posts
I agree sometimes, not always. Even though sometimes a man beats the man, he may get old and fight bums just to hold on to his title. IN that time someone comes along who is definently the better man even though they havent fought.
That is the only thing i see wrong Lance, we dont have that problem now though, i was thinking that was going to happen with Casamayor but he's stepped up to the plate against Katisidis.

The ring is the best thing that happened to boxing IMO.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,996 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I like RING mag. , its the best magazine covering boxing. As far as their rankings i agree most of the time , i dont always agree with thembut for the most part they do a great job. I do think we should get rid of some of those titles it seems like everybody got a belt. I personally have no problem with Casa being rated above Nate Campbell.
I feel the same way. They are #1 in my book in regards to ratings and consistency. The Ring is the best and means more to me than any other title. However, it's a fact that The Ring Champion didn't necessarily have to win the belt, rather be hand picked by a bunch of men and/or women sitting around a board room. It's a touchy issue.

I wish it were only one world champion for each division and he had to fight at least 4 times a year. I think that would be perfect. Then for there to be a national champion for each country, then regional, ect. I honestly don't understand the alphabet titles too well.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
25,712 Posts
"To be the man, you have to beat the man"

I like that!

That means Mayweather is should still be the 154lbs Ring champion.

You cant hold titles at two diffrent weights, anyway, Oscar was not the ring champ at 154 when pbf beat him.

Using that logic though if Calzaghe beats Hopkins which he should then he'd be Ring Champ at 168 and 175.

It dont work that way though does it?
 

· Banned
Joined
·
25,712 Posts
Yes he was.
Ummm, no he was not, he was ranked 3 behind Stinx and Forrest.

There aint been a linear champ at 154 since Tito. :p

The last guy to hold more than one belt there was Oscar after he beat Vargas but he moved up and won the WBO middleweight title from Sturm, he fought Hopkins up there after that.

Oscar only won the WBC strap from Mayorga after this, which Mayorga won when it was vacant against Piccirillo, that hardly made him the linear champ did it?

Does name alone get you this acolade now in your opinion?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,124 Posts
I subscribe to The Ring. The writers are excellent and it's hard to argue with the ratings especially with all the crap belts out there. Hopefully it's as unbiased as it appears. I also appreciate the rich history, and stories. I consider it pretty much gospel.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,314 Posts
See the big problem with one champion per division is the fact that they don't fight often enough for everyone who deserves a title shot to get one. guys with one or more losses on their records will really suffer trying to get there shot. That's the main reason I like the 4 main sanctions where they can just unify.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,314 Posts
I subscribe to The Ring. The writers are excellent and it's hard to argue with the ratings especially with all the crap belts out there. Hopefully it's as unbiased as it appears. I also appreciate the rich history, and stories. I consider it pretty much gospel.
Man it's hard enough to find GOOD material on boxing anyway, the Ring imo is fantastic and I hope they don't stop anytime soon.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,124 Posts
See the big problem with one champion per division is the fact that they don't fight often enough for everyone who deserves a title shot to get one. guys with one ore more losses on their records will really suffer trying to get there shot. That's the main reson I like the 4 main sanctions where they can just unify.
Good points. Come to think of it, if all the sanctioning bodies were gone, it may very well hurt the sport allot. More belts mean more money, and that's what drives every sport. Quite a conundrum, curse them one minute, be thankful the next...LOL
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
I like the Ring concept of things. One of the best things to happen for boxing
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top