WBO - this will test them.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 29 Apr 2004, 07:21

Seems like (according to the BBC website) that Wladimir Klitchko will be writing petitions and taking legal action if he is not made the WBO #1 contendor, despite his comprehensive world title defeat.

If the WBO have any bottle they will stay firm, how downgrading would it be for their organisation if the threat of legal action will force them to make someone with back to back WBO world title defeats (by KO) their mandatory challenger.

The WBO have a history of being very leanient, especially with their Heavyweight title (remember them giving back the belt to Bowe after he posted to them). So this one will be interesting, if Wlad is made #1 contendor I will lose a lot of respect. To be honest, I think even Matt Skelton deserves a shot before Wlad (at least he is undefeated).

J · Post by J » 29 Apr 2004, 07:23

Totally agree Stu this will be on a par with the shambolic instatement of Ruiz as WBA champ, its all a friggin joke if you ask me.

Why cant people be honest and say ok beat by the better man on the night but i'll be back have a couple of decent fights to "earn" the crack rather than whining like a baby thats had its sweets taken away.

pathetic.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 29 Apr 2004, 07:32

J wrote:Totally agree Stu this will be on a par with the shambolic instatement of Ruiz as WBA champ, its all a friggin joke if you ask me. .

I didn't find that to bad to be honest, Ruiz didn't complain, didn't demand a rematch. He fought for an interim belt against a top ten fighter (and former champion) and won fairly. The same as Javier Castillejo, who incidently is still the WBC interim champion - two years after winning that belt!!

Jones was giving a certain number of days to signal his intentions, and he did by signing to fight Tarver.

If this was Klitchko's first world title defeat then I wouldn't mind, after all he did very well as the WBO champion but to lose in a vacant title when given the second chance by the WBO - no more shots untill its earned.

J · Post by J » 29 Apr 2004, 07:37

fair point but..............

I personally feel that Ruiz should have fought for the vacant belt having lost to Jones against whomever, to re-instate a champ that has just been beaten stinks IMO when he last fought for the title without officially contesting the aforesaid belt .

fair enough he had kept busy since but there's something inherently wrong about making the guy a champ when 1. he lost the belt and 2 he never actually offcially fought for it to get it back?

Im not a fan of this interim belt bullshit, yet more confusion to an already confusing political pile of manure that buys the sanctioning bodies yet more options and manouverability

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 29 Apr 2004, 07:43

J wrote: fair point but..............

I personally feel that Ruiz should have fought for the vacant belt having lost to Jones against whomever, to re-instate a champ that has just been beaten stinks IMO when he last fought for the title without officially contesting the aforesaid belt .

fair enough he had kept busy since but there's something inherently wrong about making the guy a champ when 1. he lost the belt and 2 he never actually offcially fought for it to get it back?

Im not a fan of this interim belt bullshit, yet more confusion to an already confusing political pile of manure that buys the sanctioning bodies yet more options and manouverability

So are you trying to say you would have prefered Ruiz vs Rahman for a straight WBA vacant title? The end result is the same.

J · Post by J » 29 Apr 2004, 08:01

no not necessarily what Im saying is he should have had to fight for the title after Jones vacated it, not be given it.

Correct me if Im wrong but the champ of the world should surely have to earn that mantle not be donated it as the organsations favourite son.

I know this is immaterial now as Ruiz beat Osquendo but that should have been for the vacant belt not Ruiz as champ and free to pick his opponent.

With the German influence on the WBO a similiar thing could well happen by instating Vlad as No 1 challenger again, who is calling the shots here to fighters or the organisations?

THEBUTCH · Post by **THEBUTCH** » 29 Apr 2004, 08:34

Unless Wladimir's people can find something illegal in Brewster's performance then they have not got a leg to stand on. I've never heard such tripe (admittedly my source was teletext

) that it would now seem Wladimir is demanding a rematch because he didn't feel right!!!

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 29 Apr 2004, 08:43

Wladimir makes me sick. He lost fairly and squarely to Brewster and is trying to turn a catastrophe into a controversey. There's nothing worse than a bad loser.

J · Post by J » 29 Apr 2004, 08:45

bennie wrote:Wladimir makes me sick. He lost fairly and squarely to Brewster and is trying to turn a catastrophe into a controversey. There's nothing worse than a bad loser.

totally agree, I went right off Alex arthur for the same reason. excuses even if valid in the case of a cold etc etc should be kept private. just makes the individual look like an arse and does them no favours.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 29 Apr 2004, 09:35

WLADIMIR, IF YOU'RE WATCHING THIS, YOU'RE A fornicating PUSSY, AND YOU DON'T DESERVE A TITLE BELT!!!

J · Post by J » 29 Apr 2004, 09:44

crash. there goes that fence again

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 29 Apr 2004, 09:46

Remember when the WBO gave Barrera his super bantamweight belt back after his controversial loss to Erik Morales? What a load of BS that was.

I wouldn't expect Brewster to get any favours here.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 29 Apr 2004, 09:47

At least that was deserved, Barrera did get ripped off somewhat after all.

This is totally different, Wlad got battered into a coma by his opponent, if he was ill, it's his bloody problem, and you don't retain your belt or get automatic try again because of illness. If he had been that fornicating ill he would have known it going into the fight, and should have postponed it.

He's just crying like a big jessie. I hope they fight again and he gets knocked cold.

glittermonkey · Post by **glittermonkey** » 29 Apr 2004, 10:03

jamesmcdonnell wrote:He's just crying like a big jessie. I hope they fight again and he gets knocked cold.

Wow! Sums up my thoughts perfectly.
If the WBO fold on this it could lead to a huge glut of fighters making bogus excuses as to why they lost their title or title shot, and demanding a rematch because the WBO gave Wlad one.
He should just front up like a real man and concede that he was beaten fairly by the better fighter on the night, and then go out and try to earn his rematch like any fighter with an ounce of bottle. There's nothing i like more than to see a poor loser get what he deserves. What this guy deserves is a spanking that robs him of his excuses.

Southpaw Stylist · Post by **Southpaw Stylist** » 29 Apr 2004, 10:05

jamesmcdonnell wrote:This is totally different, Wlad got battered into a coma by his opponent, if he was ill, it's his bloody problem, and you don't retain your belt or get automatic try again because of illness. If he had been that fornicating ill he would have known it going into the fight, and should have postponed it.

He's just crying like a big jessie. I hope they fight again and he gets knocked cold.

I agree.

Same as my thoughts on Winky-Mosley II also.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 29 Apr 2004, 10:10

In what respect? You mean you hope Mosley gets knocked cold, or you think Winky deserved to get stripped of his title, or what?

Southpaw Stylist · Post by **Southpaw Stylist** » 29 Apr 2004, 10:14

I hope Mosley gets a bigger beating for messing up Winky's plans and in effect getting him stripped of the IBF strap.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 29 Apr 2004, 10:34

Ah right.

However, surely as rematch clauses are non-enforcable, Winky could have told Mosley to go poke himself, although I guess Winky felt obliged after Mosley gave him the shot.

You've got to respect Mosley for giving Winky the shot, when there were bigger fights out there for him.

Winky also knew it was the biggest money fight for him.

However, Mosley has made a big mistake, and this fight will I think be the end of his career, at least as title contender, he's too high in weight, too pumped from weight training, too slow and too one-dimensional now, and a little gunshy. The dream is over.

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 29 Apr 2004, 10:48

jamesmcdonnell wrote:At least that was deserved, Barrera did get ripped off somewhat after all.

Thing is would the WBO have done the same for Morales had he been robbed? No way on earth.

Too often these organisations have their little favourites.

mickeybeard · Post by **mickeybeard** » 29 Apr 2004, 11:07

sarcasm/ If Wlad suceeds, I might write to the WBO saying that I was forced to give up going to my local ABC at age 17 due to being lazy and liking my beer too much, and demand a title. I reckon I'd have a at least a 50/50 chance once the precident has been set.

In fact, with all the different weight classes and throw the 'intercontinental' titles in, we might well be able to get a championship belt for every regular poster on here. That'll look impressive at the next Boxrec/BA piss-up. I've got a mate who's a solicitor who can write the letters, but you'll all have to think of your own spurious excuse.

/endsarcasm

If Wlad is indeed pushing this through, he's a c*nt, and I hope he gets well and truely spanked in any rematched.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 29 Apr 2004, 15:27

That's the trouble with fake titles, there just so erm...fake! That is why i stick with the GBO, the world's only legitimate sanctioning body. There motto is:

"If your fighters shot, he gets one"

neil r · Post by **neil r** » 29 Apr 2004, 15:35

J wrote: Correct me if Im wrong but the champ of the world should surely have to earn that mantle not be donated it as the organsations favourite son.

much the same way that a certain heavyweight picked his out the bin??

bigynzing · Post by **bigynzing** » 29 Apr 2004, 16:53

neil r wrote:
J wrote: Correct me if Im wrong but the champ of the world should surely have to earn that mantle not be donated it as the organsations favourite son.

much the same way that a certain heavyweight picked his out the bin??

Yes but that certain heavy hadnt lost 2 out of his last 3

neil r · Post by **neil r** » 29 Apr 2004, 17:04

bigynzing wrote:
neil r wrote:
J wrote: Correct me if Im wrong but the champ of the world should surely have to earn that mantle not be donated it as the organsations favourite son.

much the same way that a certain heavyweight picked his out the bin??

Yes but that certain heavy hadnt lost 2 out of his last 3

certainly didnt win it in the ring. which after all is the sentiment of the statement

J · Post by J » 30 Apr 2004, 05:38

i dont disagre with that even if ti slating my hero, fairs fair gotta be consistent.
Should have fought for it, thought it at the time and think it now