WBO Credibility

Finch · Post by **Finch** » 30 Jan 2009, 14:27

As mentioned on another thread, some believe the WBo is not a credible "world title". Can i ask why ?

Currently, Pavlik, Klitchsko, Holt and Campbell hold versions of this title amoung others. And Recently Calzaghe, Haye, Maccrinelli. All worth World Champions

Adamj1987 · Post by **Adamj1987** » 30 Jan 2009, 14:37

imo its not the champions themselves usually just the way the WBO operate eg - not rating other champions and want there champions to do defence after defence instead of unifying

they were also the last of the "big 4" to be created

banjo · Post by **banjo** » 30 Jan 2009, 14:41

To be fair I don't think any organisation ranks another champion in their ratings either, it's not just the WBO.

Personally I think they are all as corrupt as each other.

Finch · Post by **Finch** » 30 Jan 2009, 14:41

The others don't rank other champions either do they ? Or do they ?

brian13 · Post by **brian13** » 30 Jan 2009, 19:23

Finch wrote:As mentioned on another thread, some believe the WBo is not a credible "world title". Can i ask why ?

Currently, Pavlik, Klitchsko, Holt and Campbell hold versions of this title amoung others. And Recently Calzaghe, Haye, Maccrinelli. All worth World Champions

You missed Calderon he is the best one of the lot of them

The WBO is horrible the rankings are terrible , its not creditable and looking at Calzaghe record he fought mainly crap. Also you have to idiot promoters controlling it with that lunatic German/Turkish one and FW.

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 30 Jan 2009, 19:36

Adamj1987 wrote:imo its not the champions themselves usually just the way the WBO operate eg - not rating other champions and want there champions to do defence after defence instead of unifying

The WBO is probably the best for allowing their champions to unify, as they don't enforce mandatory defences as much as the other sanctioning bodies.

gobbles · Post by **gobbles** » 30 Jan 2009, 22:28

The worst, by far, are the IBF. How can they have a final eliminator for a world title of Vilches v urango, two terrible Hatton opponents. The also served up Ray Austin for Klitschko and strip all the best champions - Calzaghe was stripped for not facing Stieglitz, Hatton for not facing N'Dou. What a joke.

Finch · Post by **Finch** » 31 Jan 2009, 05:56

brian13 wrote:
Finch wrote:As mentioned on another thread, some believe the WBo is not a credible "world title". Can i ask why ?

Currently, Pavlik, Klitchsko, Holt and Campbell hold versions of this title amoung others. And Recently Calzaghe, Haye, Maccrinelli. All worth World Champions
You missed Calderon he is the best one of the lot of them

The WBO is horrible the rankings are terrible , its not creditable and looking at Calzaghe record he fought mainly crap. Also you have to idiot promoters controlling it with that lunatic German/Turkish one and FW.

The rankings are terrible................... IN YOUR OPINION, no ????

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 31 Jan 2009, 06:41

The WBO even ranked a dead guy. That says it all. At super middle, when super Joe was champ!

gobbles · Post by **gobbles** » 31 Jan 2009, 06:49

Autobarn wrote:The WBO even ranked a dead guy. That says it all. At super middle, when super Joe was champ!

The IBF put Leavander Johnson in at No 6 as he lay in a coma after losing his title to Jesus Chavez.

black panther · Post by **black panther** » 31 Jan 2009, 08:47

1. As mentioned their rankings are terrible - based more upon which fighters are with promoters that have favour with the WBO rather than how good the fighters are.

2. They never enforce mandatories unless a promoter with some clout gets his fighter into the mandatory slot. In Calzaghe's ten year reign(or however long it was) he made only two mandatories I can think of.

Regarding the IBF - they are pretty terrible as well. Absolutely no common-sense whatsoever when it comes to stripping champions. But the reason they are so "strip-happy" is because they got done in 1999 by the F.B.I for accepting bribes for ranking fighters and other such mis-demeanours alledgedly. So now they enforce their own rules without using any common-sense. I do believe Hatton has been the challenger for that belt three times now, despite never losing it in the ring!

jlh · Post by **jlh** » 31 Jan 2009, 12:43

In regards to david haye holding the wbo title, i say that doesnt tell the full story... He never wanted the WBO title, i remember when he was waiting to fight Mormeck, that he and enzo were discuissing a fight. Haye stated he didn't want to fight for the WBO title as it would affect hes WBC title shot and that he wanted it as a non title fight.
Says it all really about the WBO. Personally I would say all boxers don't rate the WBO, they just use it as a ploy to become world champion...

WildWaylon · Post by **WildWaylon** » 31 Jan 2009, 13:41

Why have the WBO title if it isnt being recognized. We seem to have got rid of the WBU which was a laugh, so if its not seen as a true title then fighters need to boycott WBO title shots. Its the same with commonwealth titles, they dont mean that much either. Most fighters would prefer the British Lonsdale belt, except Khan who is frightened he will lose at British level. There are too many World titles, just imagine if we had 4 versions of the British title. There really has to be some pruning of titles, such as intercontinental champion its spoiling the sport.

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 31 Jan 2009, 14:16

gobbles wrote:The IBF put Leavander Johnson in at No 6 as he lay in a coma after losing his title to Jesus Chavez.

So they should have assumed that he was going to die and taken him out of the rankings? I think they did the right thing in that situation.

brian13 · Post by **brian13** » 31 Jan 2009, 16:42

WildWaylon wrote:Why have the WBO title if it isnt being recognized. We seem to have got rid of the WBU which was a laugh, so if its not seen as a true title then fighters need to boycott WBO title shots. Its the same with commonwealth titles, they dont mean that much either. Most fighters would prefer the British Lonsdale belt, except Khan who is frightened he will lose at British level. There are too many World titles, just imagine if we had 4 versions of the British title. There really has to be some pruning of titles, such as intercontinental champion its spoiling the sport.

Two words to that FW, they are the only two words missing in that post because they are practically the titles he uses

brian13 · Post by **brian13** » 31 Jan 2009, 16:43

jlh wrote:In regards to david haye holding the wbo title, i say that doesnt tell the full story... He never wanted the WBO title, i remember when he was waiting to fight Mormeck, that he and enzo were discuissing a fight. Haye stated he didn't want to fight for the WBO title as it would affect hes WBC title shot and that he wanted it as a non title fight.
Says it all really about the WBO. Personally I would say all boxers don't rate the WBO, they just use it as a ploy to become world champion...

He vacated that title very quickly after he beat Enzo, so he doesn't care about it

chinny · Post by **chinny** » 01 Feb 2009, 11:03

brian13 wrote:
jlh wrote:In regards to david haye holding the wbo title, i say that doesnt tell the full story... He never wanted the WBO title, i remember when he was waiting to fight Mormeck, that he and enzo were discuissing a fight. Haye stated he didn't want to fight for the WBO title as it would affect hes WBC title shot and that he wanted it as a non title fight.
Says it all really about the WBO. Personally I would say all boxers don't rate the WBO, they just use it as a ploy to become world champion...
He vacated that title very quickly after he beat Enzo, so he doesn't care about it

He vacated them all very quickly after beating Enzo because he moved up to heavy!

He (or some bints) brought all three to the ring for the Barrett fight.

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » 02 Feb 2009, 13:28

brian13 wrote:
jlh wrote:In regards to david haye holding the wbo title, i say that doesnt tell the full story... He never wanted the WBO title, i remember when he was waiting to fight Mormeck, that he and enzo were discuissing a fight. Haye stated he didn't want to fight for the WBO title as it would affect hes WBC title shot and that he wanted it as a non title fight.
Says it all really about the WBO. Personally I would say all boxers don't rate the WBO, they just use it as a ploy to become world champion...
He vacated that title very quickly after he beat Enzo, so he doesn't care about it

?!?! He moved up to heavy....

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 02 Feb 2009, 13:32

I dont think the WBA WBC or IBF would have given us Cook - Arthur as a 'World Title' fight.

banjo · Post by **banjo** » 02 Feb 2009, 13:36

WBO is decent as a stepping stone to bigger fights, brings more recognition and money than a national or continental belt.

Old bones Ian · Post by **Old bones Ian** » 02 Feb 2009, 13:44

MatthewS wrote:I dont think the WBA WBC or IBF would have given us Cook - Arthur as a 'World Title' fight.

The WBA are a joke, we have 2 heavyweight champions, 2 Welterweight champions, 2 super bantam, 2 bantam, 2 super fly,

banjo · Post by **banjo** » 02 Feb 2009, 13:48

WBC Champion Emeritus is the best one

whiskey · Post by **whiskey** » 02 Feb 2009, 17:32

Didnt the WBO put a dead fella up a few rankings some months after his death ?#

FFS that is a pony outfit if they did that !

I remember Bob Arum saying that he used to have to pay off their 'bagman' to get his fighters a shot..

Finch · Post by **Finch** » 03 Feb 2009, 03:06

Old bones Ian wrote:
MatthewS wrote:I dont think the WBA WBC or IBF would have given us Cook - Arthur as a 'World Title' fight.
The WBA are a joke, we have 2 heavyweight champions, 2 Welterweight champions, 2 super bantam, 2 bantam, 2 super fly,

And they have Valuev as a world champion.

ALI · Post by **ALI** » 03 Feb 2009, 04:39

Given the WBO's extremely wierd ratings, its very hard to believe corruption is not taking place somewhere down the line. I would like to say a lot more on that but do not wish to bring myself, or the Boxrec website, any heat!

The IBF were exposed around 10 years ago and anyone who watched the documentary would have been astonished at just how simplistic the whole IBF/bribing thing went. Anyone interested can watch the whole documentary here, runtime is about 2 hours:
http://www.ringsideboxingshow.com/BOXDO ... rkSide.htm

The IBF should have been banished from the face of the earth. And after everything they did to our sport and its competitors, some of there most recent actions have been so far of the mark that one has to wonder just what the hell they are getting up to now!

WBO Credibility

WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility

Re: WBO Credibility