yet more WBA confusion

Post Reply
caffrey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 379
Joined: 16 Sep 2008, 15:52

yet more WBA confusion

Post by caffrey »

noticed that a fight is scheduled on 21st november between marcos maidana and william gonzalez for the interim WBA light welter trinket when the real champion amir kahn fights his designated number one contender dimitri salita on the 5th december and so fullfilling his obligations.

whats going on here then guys? have i missed something
chrisfinch
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 334
Joined: 17 Jan 2009, 14:20

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by chrisfinch »

caffrey wrote:noticed that a fight is scheduled on 21st november between marcos maidana and william gonzalez for the interim WBA light welter trinket when the real champion amir kahn fights his designated number one contender dimitri salita on the 5th december and so fullfilling his obligations.

whats going on here then guys? have i missed something
the winner has to face Khan or Salita next. Why its for the interim title and not a final eliminator is beyond me though.
lowersmiths
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by lowersmiths »

you can't defend (and pay sanctioning fees) for winning a final eliminator
crusader
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16875
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 20:14

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by crusader »

It seems pretty routine now that there are interim champions even when a full champion is fulfilling his obligations. Then of course we can add the super champion into the mix and we have 3 WBA world champs. I wonder when they are going to have an Interim-Interim champion.
slapbangwhallop
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by slapbangwhallop »

crusader wrote:It seems pretty routine now that there are interim champions even when a full champion is fulfilling his obligations. Then of course we can add the super champion into the mix and we have 3 WBA world champs. I wonder when they are going to have an Interim-Interim champion.
dont forget the ould champion in resess! thats make dour "champions" in ONE organisation
crusader
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16875
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 20:14

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by crusader »

"The WBA Interim Super Champion in Recess"
slapbangwhallop
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by slapbangwhallop »

crusader wrote:"The WBA Interim Super Champion in Recess"
"The WBA Regular Interim Super Champion in Recess"
dbflex
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 870
Joined: 08 Nov 2007, 12:53

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by dbflex »

Have to check but pretty sure Maidana won the interim belt v Ortiz as his mandatory rematch with proper champ Kotelnik was delayed for Khans shot.
hitman_hatton1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6150
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 20:57

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by hitman_hatton1 »

dbflex wrote:Have to check but pretty sure Maidana won the interim belt v Ortiz as his mandatory rematch with proper champ Kotelnik was delayed for Khans shot.
yeah.

he won the interim title in that fight.

therefore the wba will get fees off him for this upcoming fight.

all money money money. :twisted:
Carbo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1827
Joined: 23 Nov 2006, 14:25

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by Carbo »

Who cares? They're a bunch of lecherous pigs that are ruining the game, but I try to pay as little attention as possible.

Everyone seems willing to complain, but not to, say, boycott fights for alphabet belts, write to the TV channels saying they'll not watch fights that feature those belts, or do much else.

We all know they're crooks and in many cases outright corrupt that have their fangs plunged deep into boxing's neck, sucking out it's life blood, but wake me up when we're willing to do more than pen the occasional passive-aggressive forum post, or tut-tut at the latest Thomas Hauser feature.
hitman_hatton1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6150
Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 20:57

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by hitman_hatton1 »

Carbo wrote:Who cares? They're a bunch of lecherous pigs that are ruining the game, but I try to pay as little attention as possible.

Everyone seems willing to complain, but not to, say, boycott fights for alphabet belts, write to the TV channels saying they'll not watch fights that feature those belts, or do much else.

We all know they're crooks and in many cases outright corrupt that have their fangs plunged deep into boxing's neck, sucking out it's life blood, but wake me up when we're willing to do more than pen the occasional passive-aggressive forum post, or tut-tut at the latest Thomas Hauser feature.
the promoters will tow the line when it comes to the sanctioning bodies.

cos at the end of the day they can provide there fighters with opportunities and better paydays.

they do serve a purpose in the sport whether we like it or not.

no alternative has ever been offered to replace em sadly. :roll:
chinny
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1536
Joined: 18 Jun 2007, 09:33

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by chinny »

lowersmiths wrote:you can't defend (and pay sanctioning fees) for winning a final eliminator
Not true - you pay (less) to take part in eliminators too!
Carbo
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1827
Joined: 23 Nov 2006, 14:25

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by Carbo »

hitman_hatton1 wrote:
Carbo wrote:Who cares? They're a bunch of lecherous pigs that are ruining the game, but I try to pay as little attention as possible.

Everyone seems willing to complain, but not to, say, boycott fights for alphabet belts, write to the TV channels saying they'll not watch fights that feature those belts, or do much else.

We all know they're crooks and in many cases outright corrupt that have their fangs plunged deep into boxing's neck, sucking out it's life blood, but wake me up when we're willing to do more than pen the occasional passive-aggressive forum post, or tut-tut at the latest Thomas Hauser feature.
the promoters will tow the line when it comes to the sanctioning bodies.

cos at the end of the day they can provide there fighters with opportunities and better paydays.

they do serve a purpose in the sport whether we like it or not.

no alternative has ever been offered to replace em sadly. :roll:
There is no need for an alternative. Why do we need sanctioning bodies? What do they do?

They are superfluous parts of the boxing whole, which need to be irradiated, destroyed and cut out like a cluster of malignant cancer cells.
twenty six
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3574
Joined: 17 Jun 2006, 13:43

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by twenty six »

.... and the alternative is ?
There would have to be one mate and I fear that it would lead to the sport being controlled by certain Promotors.
Is that any more healthy ?
caffrey
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 379
Joined: 16 Sep 2008, 15:52

Re: yet more WBA confusion

Post by caffrey »

apparently there was a show in thailand with both the interim and full champion of the same organistaion at the same weight fighting on the
same bill :lol:
Post Reply