Boxing Forum - Boxing Discussion Forums banner

Do you agree with: The Ring Magazine?

949 Views 19 Replies 8 Participants Last post by  Wicked Shot
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.
1 - 3 of 20 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.
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.
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
you don't know how right you are there.:thumbsup:
1 - 3 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.