WBA rankings

Post Reply
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

WBA rankings

Post by lefty »

Check the super middleweight rankings out! Froch apparantly is the "unified champion" although the regular title is vacant even though I thought that was exactly what Froch held and Ward is the super champion. It's a complete farce!




SUPER MIDDLEWEIGHT 168 Lbs /76.20 Kgs
UNIFIED WORLD CHAMPION CARL FROCH GBR
SUPER WORLD CHAMPION ANDRE WARD USA

WORLD CHAMPION VACANT

WBC SAKIO BIKA
IBF CARL FROCH
WBO ROBERT STIEGLITZ
TITLE BOXER ORGANIZATION COUNTRY
1 STANYSLAV KASHTANOV INTERIM CHAMP UKR
2 GEORGE GROVES GBR
3 EDWIN RODRIGUEZ DOM
4 MIKKEL KESSLER DNK
5 DMITRY SARTISON DEU
6 BADOU JACK SWE
7 JUNIOR TALIPEAU LAC AUS
8 ANDRE DIRRELL USA
9 JAMES DEGALE GBR
10 NIKOLA SJEKLOCA SCG
11 SERVER YEMURLAYEV UKR
12 BEN MCCULLOCH PABA AUS
13 BASTIE SAMIR GHA
14 JULIUS JACKSON USA
15 PAUL SMITH GBR
SamWise72
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1346
Joined: 02 Jul 2011, 16:41

Re: WBA rankings

Post by SamWise72 »

Ooh, might be setting an exciting new bar. Three different world champs in the same division from the same organisation? This time next year, Rodney, we'll ALL be world champs.
earsjohn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1691
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 14:34

Re: WBA rankings

Post by earsjohn »

How about Beibut Shumenov being bumped up to Super Champion having not fought in 16 months? His promotion creates a handy Juergen Braehmar/Marcus Oliveira shaped hole for the normal title.
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: WBA rankings

Post by lefty »

Boxing is becoming more farcical by the minute which I didnt believe was possible.....
digzee
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1582
Joined: 11 Nov 2008, 13:49

Re: WBA rankings

Post by digzee »

So does this mean Froch is a higher rated champion then super world champion Ward? and if so, if Groves beats Froch will he become No.1 according to them?
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: WBA rankings

Post by lefty »

digzee wrote:So does this mean Froch is a higher rated champion then super world champion Ward? and if so, if Groves beats Froch will he become No.1 according to them?
I genuinely have no idea mate! Haha
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: WBA rankings

Post by lefty »

The IBF rankings seem just as if not even more bizarre!


CHAMPION: Carl Froch United Kingdom
Title won: May 26. 2012 Mandatory: Feb 26. 2013 Defended : May 25. 2013
WBA: Carl Froch United Kingdom
WBC: Andre Ward United States
WBO: Robert Stieglitz Germany
1 NOT RATED
2 NOT RATED
3 Thomas Oosthuizen South Africa
4 George Groves England
5 James De Gale England
6 Brandon Gonzales United States
7 Maksim Vlasov Russian Federation
8 Andre Dirrell United States
9 Mouhamed Ali Ndiaye Italy
10 Arthur Abraham Germany
11 Anthony Dirrell United States
12 Lucian Bute Canada
13 Giovanni De Carolis Italy
14 Badou Jack Sweden
15 Alexander Brand United States
digzee
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1582
Joined: 11 Nov 2008, 13:49

Re: WBA rankings

Post by digzee »

The worst thing about this is I cant see it changing for the better, as long as the money is coming in the organization's don't give a sh1t.
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: WBA rankings

Post by lefty »

Froch is basically mandatory by default.
Exoddus
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1517
Joined: 08 Oct 2007, 10:30

Re: WBA rankings

Post by Exoddus »

I'm a long time boxing fan and I don't even know what the hell all these different titles and ranks mean and who holds what any more. God knows what the casual boxing fan thinks. Confusion will only stop the casual fan getting properly into boxing. They'll tune in to the UFC instead. Where things are much more simplified and you don't have all the politics.
handsofstone
Cruiserweight
Posts: 23248
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 17:28

Re: WBA rankings

Post by handsofstone »

columbo wrote:The IBF rankings seem just as if not even more bizarre!


CHAMPION: Carl Froch United Kingdom
Title won: May 26. 2012 Mandatory: Feb 26. 2013 Defended : May 25. 2013
WBA: Carl Froch United Kingdom
WBC: Andre Ward United States
WBO: Robert Stieglitz Germany
1 NOT RATED
2 NOT RATED
3 Thomas Oosthuizen South Africa
4 George Groves England
5 James De Gale England
6 Brandon Gonzales United States
7 Maksim Vlasov Russian Federation
8 Andre Dirrell United States
9 Mouhamed Ali Ndiaye Italy
10 Arthur Abraham Germany
11 Anthony Dirrell United States
12 Lucian Bute Canada
13 Giovanni De Carolis Italy
14 Badou Jack Sweden
15 Alexander Brand United States
Isnt Sakio Bika the WBC champ :?? BM rankings arent listing him either,and Alegedllys schedule listings claim Ward/Rodriguez fight for WBA Super title
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: WBA rankings

Post by lefty »

handsofstone wrote:
columbo wrote:The IBF rankings seem just as if not even more bizarre!


CHAMPION: Carl Froch United Kingdom
Title won: May 26. 2012 Mandatory: Feb 26. 2013 Defended : May 25. 2013
WBA: Carl Froch United Kingdom
WBC: Andre Ward United States
WBO: Robert Stieglitz Germany
1 NOT RATED
2 NOT RATED
3 Thomas Oosthuizen South Africa
4 George Groves England
5 James De Gale England
6 Brandon Gonzales United States
7 Maksim Vlasov Russian Federation
8 Andre Dirrell United States
9 Mouhamed Ali Ndiaye Italy
10 Arthur Abraham Germany
11 Anthony Dirrell United States
12 Lucian Bute Canada
13 Giovanni De Carolis Italy
14 Badou Jack Sweden
15 Alexander Brand United States
Isnt Sakio Bika the WBC champ :?? BM rankings arent listing him either,and Alegedllys schedule listings claim Ward/Rodriguez fight for WBA Super title
Im completely confused by it all mate to be honest haha. Bika is fighting Anthony Dirrell next and i have a feeling he'll be losing his belt.
jameswilson
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 13502
Joined: 08 Jan 2004, 18:01

Re: WBA rankings

Post by jameswilson »

I actually thought Ward had been stripped by the WBA because of how long he had been inactive. Obviously I am wrong.
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: WBA rankings

Post by lefty »

jameswilson wrote:I actually thought Ward had been stripped by the WBA because of how long he had been inactive. Obviously I am wrong.
It's like Vitali Klitschko situation though. If they like a particular fighter they basically do whatever they want by the looks of things.
handsofstone
Cruiserweight
Posts: 23248
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 17:28

Re: WBA rankings

Post by handsofstone »

columbo wrote:
jameswilson wrote:I actually thought Ward had been stripped by the WBA because of how long he had been inactive. Obviously I am wrong.
It's like Vitali Klitschko situation though. If they like a particular fighter they basically do whatever they want by the looks of things.
I was under the impression was Ward was Super champ and Kessler was Regular champ and he was defending that belt in the unification fight with Froch,but then Ward got stripped of both his WBA Super belt and WBC title,so the winner of Froch/Kessler would be Super champ,so i assumed Froch was the only WBA champ now,but now Wards defending his Super title :witzend:
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: WBA rankings

Post by lefty »

handsofstone wrote:
columbo wrote:
jameswilson wrote:I actually thought Ward had been stripped by the WBA because of how long he had been inactive. Obviously I am wrong.
It's like Vitali Klitschko situation though. If they like a particular fighter they basically do whatever they want by the looks of things.
I was under the impression was Ward was Super champ and Kessler was Regular champ and he was defending that belt in the unification fight with Froch,but then Ward got stripped of both his WBA Super belt and WBC title,so the winner of Froch/Kessler would be Super champ,so i assumed Froch was the only WBA champ now,but now Wards defending his Super title :witzend:
Tell me about it. It's completely farcical.
expe
Super Middleweight
Posts: 6871
Joined: 07 Oct 2012, 10:10

Re: WBA rankings

Post by expe »

Ward was stripped of the WBC belt that Bika went on to win, but not the WBA Super title. Kessler took the WBA regular title that Brian Magee was upgraded to from the interim belt and then fought Froch with it on the title, because Froch was IBF champion it was a unification fight, which would usually mean the super title would be on the line, but Ward still had that, so Froch became unified champion, leaving the regular title vacant, giving a situation where the WBA could have three world champions and an interim champion. As for the IBF leaving 1 and 2 vacant, they do that regularly, they've even left 3 empty with fighters ranked at 1 and 2. They even have eliminators for the #2 ranking at times, but why they leave places empty is confusing.
spudder56
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1568
Joined: 16 Jun 2011, 11:27

Re: WBA rankings

Post by spudder56 »

digzee wrote:The worst thing about this is I cant see it changing for the better, as long as the money is coming in the organization's don't give a sh1t.


Spot on mate it's all about sanctioning fees
handsofstone
Cruiserweight
Posts: 23248
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 17:28

Re: WBA rankings

Post by handsofstone »

expe wrote:Ward was stripped of the WBC belt that Bika went on to win, but not the WBA Super title. Kessler took the WBA regular title that Brian Magee was upgraded to from the interim belt and then fought Froch with it on the title, because Froch was IBF champion it was a unification fight, which would usually mean the super title would be on the line, but Ward still had that, so Froch became unified champion, leaving the regular title vacant, giving a situation where the WBA could have three world champions and an interim champion. As for the IBF leaving 1 and 2 vacant, they do that regularly, they've even left 3 empty with fighters ranked at 1 and 2. They even have eliminators for the #2 ranking at times, but why they leave places empty is confusing.
So let me get this right mate,Wards Super,Regulars vacant and Froch is what,Unified? :x
Last edited by handsofstone on 04 Nov 2013, 15:26, edited 1 time in total.
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: WBA rankings

Post by lefty »

handsofstone wrote:
expe wrote:Ward was stripped of the WBC belt that Bika went on to win, but not the WBA Super title. Kessler took the WBA regular title that Brian Magee was upgraded to from the interim belt and then fought Froch with it on the title, because Froch was IBF champion it was a unification fight, which would usually mean the super title would be on the line, but Ward still had that, so Froch became unified champion, leaving the regular title vacant, giving a situation where the WBA could have three world champions and an interim champion. As for the IBF leaving 1 and 2 vacant, they do that regularly, they've even left 3 empty with fighters ranked at 1 and 2. They even have eliminators for the #2 ranking at times, but why they leave places empty is confusing.
So let me get this right mate,Wards Super,Regular and Froch is what,Unified? :x
Froch is the unified champion using the WBA regular which was up for grabs but he no longer has that as he's "unified" champion so now the regular belt is vacant and Ward has the super title. Basically like Expe said, there could be 3 world champions within one governing body. It's a fornicating joke.
jameswilson
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 13502
Joined: 08 Jan 2004, 18:01

Re: WBA rankings

Post by jameswilson »

expe wrote:Ward was stripped of the WBC belt that Bika went on to win, but not the WBA Super title. Kessler took the WBA regular title that Brian Magee was upgraded to from the interim belt and then fought Froch with it on the title, because Froch was IBF champion it was a unification fight, which would usually mean the super title would be on the line, but Ward still had that, so Froch became unified champion, leaving the regular title vacant, giving a situation where the WBA could have three world champions and an interim champion. As for the IBF leaving 1 and 2 vacant, they do that regularly, they've even left 3 empty with fighters ranked at 1 and 2. They even have eliminators for the #2 ranking at times, but why they leave places empty is confusing.
It's purely from a mandatory point of view. The number 1 ranked guy with the IBF is the mandatory challenger who will have had to fight a final eliminator. In my opinion the IBF probably have the most credible mandatory challengers (not necessarily the best available tho) because they have over the years always forced the guy who eventually becomes no1 challenger to fight a final eliminator. Eliminators can be fought to determine number 2 and 3 I think as long as both fighters are above a certain rating with the IBF.
BillyTKid
Cruiserweight
Posts: 401
Joined: 08 Sep 2010, 13:19

Re: WBA rankings

Post by BillyTKid »

columbo wrote:
handsofstone wrote:
expe wrote:Ward was stripped of the WBC belt that Bika went on to win, but not the WBA Super title. Kessler took the WBA regular title that Brian Magee was upgraded to from the interim belt and then fought Froch with it on the title, because Froch was IBF champion it was a unification fight, which would usually mean the super title would be on the line, but Ward still had that, so Froch became unified champion, leaving the regular title vacant, giving a situation where the WBA could have three world champions and an interim champion. As for the IBF leaving 1 and 2 vacant, they do that regularly, they've even left 3 empty with fighters ranked at 1 and 2. They even have eliminators for the #2 ranking at times, but why they leave places empty is confusing.
So let me get this right mate,Wards Super,Regular and Froch is what,Unified? :x
Froch is the unified champion using the WBA regular which was up for grabs but he no longer has that as he's "unified" champion so now the regular belt is vacant and Ward has the super title. Basically like Expe said, there could be 3 world champions within one governing body. It's a effing joke.
Plus Kashtanov is interim champion. 4 world champions.
expe
Super Middleweight
Posts: 6871
Joined: 07 Oct 2012, 10:10

Re: WBA rankings

Post by expe »

BillyTKid wrote:
columbo wrote:
handsofstone wrote: So let me get this right mate,Wards Super,Regular and Froch is what,Unified? :x
Froch is the unified champion using the WBA regular which was up for grabs but he no longer has that as he's "unified" champion so now the regular belt is vacant and Ward has the super title. Basically like Expe said, there could be 3 world champions within one governing body. It's a effing joke.
Plus Kashtanov is interim champion. 4 world champions.
Interim isn't world champion, so still 3 but with a mandatory challenger with a belt as well.
Post Reply