Glowacki
Briedis
Lebedev
Huck
Dorticos
Usyk
Gassiev
Mchunu
Durodola
And maybe even kucher! There are possibly one or two more on the way up!
Even after all that talk?? Calling out lebedev? Top fighters? And even David haye? To now be fighting a 30 odd ranked fighter?? Defo a pussy move..gilgamesh wrote:I wouldn't say "Cowards fight", but I do think it's a sh*t matchup, and Bellew will win easy
Seems to be the way Boxing in general is run these days. Talk means nothing from fighters these days. A lot of fighters fight a gimme in their first title defense it's no big deal really. Now if he pulls a Deontay Wilder, and fights gimmes in ALL of his title defenses then he definitely deserves all this harsh criticism.In the know 85 wrote:Even after all that talk?? Calling out lebedev? Top fighters? And even David haye? To now be fighting a 30 odd ranked fighter?? Defo a pussy move..gilgamesh wrote:I wouldn't say "Cowards fight", but I do think it's a sh*t matchup, and Bellew will win easy
When you fight for a "vacant title" I.e you don't win the belt from a champion, then the rules are you have to fight the mandatory challenger, which in this case is briedis! If makabu was champion, then Bellew could have a voluntary shit fight as a freebie, but makabu wasn't champ, so Bellew shouldn't be able to avoid briedis.. it's just Eddie Hearn and Tony Bellew greasing a few palms and begging for a break! And as usual Eddie got it for him. Simplesgilgamesh wrote:Seems to be the way Boxing in general is run these days. Talk means nothing from fighters these days. A lot of fighters fight a gimme in their first title defense it's no big deal really. Now if he pulls a Deontay Wilder, and fights gimmes in ALL of his title defenses then he definitely deserves all this harsh criticism.In the know 85 wrote:Even after all that talk?? Calling out lebedev? Top fighters? And even David haye? To now be fighting a 30 odd ranked fighter?? Defo a pussy move..gilgamesh wrote:I wouldn't say "Cowards fight", but I do think it's a sh*t matchup, and Bellew will win easy
In the know 85 wrote:Even after all that talk?? Calling out lebedev? Top fighters? And even David haye? To now be fighting a 30 odd ranked fighter?? Defo a pussy move..gilgamesh wrote:I wouldn't say "Cowards fight", but I do think it's a sh*t matchup, and Bellew will win easy
Don't be too surprised. Take a step back. Opportunity of a shot at WBC title against Tony Bellew ....Perseus wrote:Really surprised Flores took this fight. He usually finds a way to avoid legitimate cruisers who punch back.
The only times he actually stepped up was against smaller guys moving up to the cruiser division and he got outclassed both times.
Enlightened-One wrote:A lot of world champions, when they claim their first world title belt, typically engage in an easy voluntary first defence against less than stellar opposition.
So it seems a tad unfair to single out Bellew, by screaming accusations of cowardice, ridiculing him, spouting outrageous levels of hatred and vitriol… for what is essentially common practice.
Therefore, whilst Bellew’s fight voluntary defence against Flores fails to whet my appetite, I don’t begrudge him of an easy night’s work as a one-off.
The WBC Rules and Regulations (as per their official website):In the know 85 wrote:Another blogger who can't read or chooses not to! You only get the opportunity to have a weak 1st defence, "if you win the belt off a CHAMPION" NOT fighting for a vacant title.. Do you understand now?? A vacant title win equals fighting the mandatory next.. Jesus Christ! Read a little about the blog before throwing your pointless view in.Enlightened-One wrote:A lot of world champions, when they claim their first world title belt, typically engage in an easy voluntary first defence against less than stellar opposition.
So it seems a tad unfair to single out Bellew, by screaming accusations of cowardice, ridiculing him, spouting outrageous levels of hatred and vitriol… for what is essentially common practice.
Therefore, whilst Bellew’s fight voluntary defence against Flores fails to whet my appetite, I don’t begrudge him of an easy night’s work as a one-off.
Just shown me your a bit of a geek! Not a fan of boxing! And a bit of a whimp who thinks its ok to say one thing and do another! And holds no one accountable for their actions! Typical nerd! Could prob sum you up as a "keyboard warrior" your geeky nature is prob best served elsewhere! But good luck to you anyway... Gay pride and all that!Enlightened-One wrote:The WBC Rules and Regulations (as per their official website):In the know 85 wrote:Another blogger who can't read or chooses not to! You only get the opportunity to have a weak 1st defence, "if you win the belt off a CHAMPION" NOT fighting for a vacant title.. Do you understand now?? A vacant title win equals fighting the mandatory next.. Jesus Christ! Read a little about the blog before throwing your pointless view in.Enlightened-One wrote:A lot of world champions, when they claim their first world title belt, typically engage in an easy voluntary first defence against less than stellar opposition.
So it seems a tad unfair to single out Bellew, by screaming accusations of cowardice, ridiculing him, spouting outrageous levels of hatred and vitriol… for what is essentially common practice.
Therefore, whilst Bellew’s fight voluntary defence against Flores fails to whet my appetite, I don’t begrudge him of an easy night’s work as a one-off.
The WBC may, as it in its sole discretion deems proper and necessary, impose conditions upon a new champion filling a vacant title… Upon request, the WBC may in its discretion approve one or more voluntary defences prior to ordering a mandatory defence.
Qualified Challengers: Champions shall defend their titles, either in a voluntary or mandatory defence, against a challenger (each, a “Qualified Challenger”) in one of the following categories:
(b) with the approval of or ratification by a majority of the Board of Governors,
iv. a former world champion or other elite challenger;
(c) under special circumstances and with the approval of or ratification by two-third (2/3rd) of the Board of Governors, a contender not otherwise listed in one or more of the above categories
http://wbcboxing.com/downloads/WBC_Rule ... r_2015.pdf
The WBC does not (in their own rules) define the term “elite challenger” and the WBC’s “Board of Governors” also has the freedom to approve world title challengers even if the challenger doesn’t satisfy the stipulated qualification conditions.
It is also abundantly clear that the WBC does allow new champions filling vacant titles the right to participate in one or more voluntary defences prior to ordering a mandatory defence.
To be honest with you, I’m not sure if the WBC will approve BJ Flores as a valid challenger, but my guess is that Eddie Hearn wouldn’t have arranged the bout if there wasn’t a good chance of gaining approval.
I hope I've managed to prove my reading ability to you?![]()
![]()
I then quoted the WBC’s rules and regulations, which took less than two minutes, to easily disprove your claim… and here’s your response:In the know 85 wrote:Another blogger who can't read or chooses not to! You only get the opportunity to have a weak 1st defence, "if you win the belt off a CHAMPION" NOT fighting for a vacant title.. Do you understand now?? A vacant title win equals fighting the mandatory next.. Jesus Christ! Read a little about the blog before throwing your pointless view in.
In other words, you’re a tad embarrassed, because your unprovoked attack backfired, as you've clearly picked on the wrong person!In the know 85 wrote:Just shown me your a bit of a geek! Not a fan of boxing! And a bit of a whimp who thinks its ok to say one thing and do another! And holds no one accountable for their actions! Typical nerd! Could prob sum you up as a "keyboard warrior" your geeky nature is prob best served elsewhere! But good luck to you anyway... Gay pride and all that!
Like I said your not a boxing fan, and your sticking up for a coward! Well done youEnlightened-One wrote:I then quoted the WBC’s rules and regulations, which took less than two minutes, to easily disprove your claim… and here’s your response:In the know 85 wrote:Another blogger who can't read or chooses not to! You only get the opportunity to have a weak 1st defence, "if you win the belt off a CHAMPION" NOT fighting for a vacant title.. Do you understand now?? A vacant title win equals fighting the mandatory next.. Jesus Christ! Read a little about the blog before throwing your pointless view in.In other words, you’re a tad embarrassed, because your unprovoked attack backfired, as you've clearly picked on the wrong person!In the know 85 wrote:Just shown me your a bit of a geek! Not a fan of boxing! And a bit of a whimp who thinks its ok to say one thing and do another! And holds no one accountable for their actions! Typical nerd! Could prob sum you up as a "keyboard warrior" your geeky nature is prob best served elsewhere! But good luck to you anyway... Gay pride and all that!
Someone had the testicular fortitude and intellect to challenge your aggressive stance head-on… and this has compelled you to resort to insults, because you’re powerless to do otherwise!![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Pure fiction.In the know 85 wrote:Like I said your not a boxing fan, and your sticking up for a coward!
Thank-you.In the know 85 wrote:Well done you
Pure fiction.In the know 85 wrote:You have no testicles I'm not insulting you, Just telling you what I think.
Pure nonsense.In the know 85 wrote:Nothing has backfired
Pure nonsense.In the know 85 wrote:your comments are about as brave as the coward your sticking up for
Pure nonsense.In the know 85 wrote:Not picking on anybody, especially a keyboard clown
Pure nonsense.In the know 85 wrote:eff that I'm not a bully
Pure nonsense.In the know 85 wrote:Smart replys are all good by me.
Pure fiction.In the know 85 wrote:Keep backing the cowards and you'll do well
Jesus you've got some time on your hands! Convo's finished yeahEnlightened-One wrote:Pure fiction.In the know 85 wrote:Like I said your not a boxing fan, and your sticking up for a coward!Thank-you.In the know 85 wrote:Well done youPure fiction.In the know 85 wrote:You have no testicles I'm not insulting you, Just telling you what I think.Pure nonsense.In the know 85 wrote:Nothing has backfiredPure nonsense.In the know 85 wrote:your comments are about as brave as the coward your sticking up forPure nonsense.In the know 85 wrote:Not picking on anybody, especially a keyboard clownPure nonsense.In the know 85 wrote:eff that I'm not a bullyPure nonsense.In the know 85 wrote:Smart replys are all good by me.Pure fiction.In the know 85 wrote:Keep backing the cowards and you'll do well
Wow, dude. You are pathetic.In the know 85 wrote:Just shown me your a bit of a geek! Not a fan of boxing! And a bit of a whimp who thinks its ok to say one thing and do another! And holds no one accountable for their actions! Typical nerd! Could prob sum you up as a "keyboard warrior" your geeky nature is prob best served elsewhere! But good luck to you anyway... Gay pride and all that!Enlightened-One wrote:The WBC Rules and Regulations (as per their official website):In the know 85 wrote: Another blogger who can't read or chooses not to! You only get the opportunity to have a weak 1st defence, "if you win the belt off a CHAMPION" NOT fighting for a vacant title.. Do you understand now?? A vacant title win equals fighting the mandatory next.. Jesus Christ! Read a little about the blog before throwing your pointless view in.
The WBC may, as it in its sole discretion deems proper and necessary, impose conditions upon a new champion filling a vacant title… Upon request, the WBC may in its discretion approve one or more voluntary defences prior to ordering a mandatory defence.
Qualified Challengers: Champions shall defend their titles, either in a voluntary or mandatory defence, against a challenger (each, a “Qualified Challenger”) in one of the following categories:
(b) with the approval of or ratification by a majority of the Board of Governors,
iv. a former world champion or other elite challenger;
(c) under special circumstances and with the approval of or ratification by two-third (2/3rd) of the Board of Governors, a contender not otherwise listed in one or more of the above categories
http://wbcboxing.com/downloads/WBC_Rule ... r_2015.pdf
The WBC does not (in their own rules) define the term “elite challenger” and the WBC’s “Board of Governors” also has the freedom to approve world title challengers even if the challenger doesn’t satisfy the stipulated qualification conditions.
It is also abundantly clear that the WBC does allow new champions filling vacant titles the right to participate in one or more voluntary defences prior to ordering a mandatory defence.
To be honest with you, I’m not sure if the WBC will approve BJ Flores as a valid challenger, but my guess is that Eddie Hearn wouldn’t have arranged the bout if there wasn’t a good chance of gaining approval.
I hope I've managed to prove my reading ability to you?![]()
![]()
You missed out Drozd? the man who never lost the title.In the know 85 wrote: the 9 I put above him are
Glowacki
Briedis
Lebedev
Huck
Dorticos
Usyk
Gassiev
Mchunu
Durodola
And maybe even kucher! There are possibly one or two more on the way up!