BoxRec

My point exactly. Lovemore is not the best in the division but I reckon if I went through the record books there has been worse champs than him before, and he has held the IBF (correct me if I'm wrong) title before.

amwsnw wrote:My point exactly. Lovemore is not the best in the division but I reckon if I went through the record books there has been worse champs than him before, and he has held the IBF (correct me if I'm wrong) title before.

It's a very shallow point of view to simply base the merit of a fighter holding a belt on his overall ability as a fighter. I would never deny Ndou the right to be called a world champ based on ability. But their is more to it than that.

When Ndou fought for the vacant IBO belt, he was coming off two straight losses. I know you can't contest an IBF belt coming off a loss, let alone two. His opponent had one fight in five years against unknown and unranked fighter. That should never be grounds for a title fight imo.

oliverfennell wrote:

toppity wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:
I know WE know the truth of the matter, but I guess my point - which admittedly I didn't make in the OP - is that it's misleading the more casual fans/general public. Then, to the knowledgeable fans, I just think it's insulting that reputable sites repeat the line when they know their target audience understands the difference between the belts.

And no, I'm not deliberately stirring. Like most fans, multiple belts are a bugbear of mine, but also I accept there's very little we can do about it. However there has been a subtle change in recent years to lesser belts being given less attention. Therefore I just don't like it when Green is trumpeted as a "three-weight world champion", when he plainly and simply isn't. Same as when Hoppa was giving it the big one about fighting for "the world title" in Vegas.

That's not to detract from Green as a fighter and a man, nor to detract from his fans and their right to support him, nor from the event as a true blockbuster for Australia. This is a huge fight and I'm happy for Oz to get such a prestige event, as the commercial success of this contest can only bode well for the future of the sport there. This fight is going to be HUGE and it doesn't need bogus claims about its attached title status, or about Green's achievements, to help it along.

OK then.......fair comment. It is one of my single biggest problems with the sport as well.

In which case, would you not agree the peddling of lesser belts as legit championships for the purposes of TV is a contributing factor?

Hyping Green as a "three-weight world champion" encourages other promoters/fighters to take the IBo/interim route.

I take nothing away from Green as a former WBA champion and a current top contender in the division - and what, after all, is wrong with that, in terms of hyping the fight?

I get the feeling i'm doing circle work now. It's about the Benjamins....like it or not.

perfect jet wrote:

amwsnw wrote:My point exactly. Lovemore is not the best in the division but I reckon if I went through the record books there has been worse champs than him before, and he has held the IBF (correct me if I'm wrong) title before.

It's a very shallow point of view to simply base the merit of a fighter holding a belt on his overall ability as a fighter. I would never deny Ndou the right to be called a world champ based on ability. But their is more to it than that.

When Ndou fought for the vacant IBO belt, he was coming off two straight losses. I know you can't contest an IBF belt coming off a loss, let alone two. His opponent had one fight in five years against unknown and unranked fighter. That should never be grounds for a title fight imo.

when people bring up the IBF I always think of Jeff Fenech fighting for the title after 8 local fights. Nothing can be said against his legitimacy as a champ, but it never made sense to me. Not sure how Jeff earnt the right at that stage.

As far as i'm concerned there are no flawless sanctioning bodies.

I guess we can argue the merits or otherwise of each sanctioning body forever, but I do think the term "world champion" still, for the majority of fans, connotes holding one of the big four belts (not including interim). In that regard, Green's "world title" record is 1-2.

Of course I'm not saying he isn't world class, but it just puts the "three-weight WORLD champion" claim into perspective. Sure, it's spin, I understand that, and the people behind the PR know what they're doing - trying to put Green into a very select breed of boxers.

As for the IBO, I too like their transparency, and I don't have a problem with "carry-over" points from other divisions, but I do think until they have a top TEN rather than 50 or 100, they won't be considered a real world title.

It has been a good topic and one that debate will rage on for along time. It is funny how some, me included, don't mind the term 3 time world champ when it is used for danny but laugh when it is used for Choc....yes I admit I am bias !!!! And Holy should be a 5 time world champ.

perfect jet wrote:

amwsnw wrote:My point exactly. Lovemore is not the best in the division but I reckon if I went through the record books there has been worse champs than him before, and he has held the IBF (correct me if I'm wrong) title before.

It's a very shallow point of view to simply base the merit of a fighter holding a belt on his overall ability as a fighter. I would never deny Ndou the right to be called a world champ based on ability. But their is more to it than that.

When Ndou fought for the vacant IBO belt, he was coming off two straight losses. I know you can't contest an IBF belt coming off a loss, let alone two. His opponent had one fight in five years against unknown and unranked fighter. That should never be grounds for a title fight imo.

I am doing the opposite, saying that a belt, no matter what sanctioning body, does not neccessarilly make the champ. But i dont have a problem with certain fighters based on their careers holding a belt and being called a world champ. Lovemore and Danny are two of them. They have been in better form and had better fights than when they won their belts but so be it, whilst we have all these organisations we will have literally dozens of fighters calling themselves world champs.

toppity wrote:

perfect jet wrote:

amwsnw wrote:My point exactly. Lovemore is not the best in the division but I reckon if I went through the record books there has been worse champs than him before, and he has held the IBF (correct me if I'm wrong) title before.

It's a very shallow point of view to simply base the merit of a fighter holding a belt on his overall ability as a fighter. I would never deny Ndou the right to be called a world champ based on ability. But their is more to it than that.

When Ndou fought for the vacant IBO belt, he was coming off two straight losses. I know you can't contest an IBF belt coming off a loss, let alone two. His opponent had one fight in five years against unknown and unranked fighter. That should never be grounds for a title fight imo.

when people bring up the IBF I always think of Jeff Fenech fighting for the title after 8 local fights. Nothing can be said against his legitimacy as a champ, but it never made sense to me. Not sure how Jeff earnt the right at that stage.

As far as i'm concerned there are no flawless sanctioning bodies.

Never mind Jeff. The fighter he took the IBF Bantamweight title from, Satoshi Shingaki, won the vacant title by beating Elmer Magallano of the Philippines who had lost his four previous fights, all against flyweights or light flyweights!

What were you saying about not being able to contest the IBF title coming off a loss, Danny? 8)

How times have changed Brute :)

I think you will find the IBF now have a rule whereby a fighter coming off a loss can't contest a title. Outside optional defenses,you need to contest a #1 and #2 elimination bout to fight the champion.

perfect jet wrote:How times have changed Brute :)

I think you will find the IBF now have a rule whereby a fighter coming off a loss can't contest a title. Outside optional defenses,you need to contest a #1 and #2 elimination bout to fight the champion.

Best of the lot was in 1975 when Venezuelan Luis "Lumumba" Estaba KOed Paraguayan "contender" Rafael Lovera in four one sided rounds for the vacant WBC light flyweight title.

After the fight it was found that Lovera's management had submitted a record of "phantoms" as his record. Lovera had never had a fight in his life!

Estaba went on to establish himself as a light flyweight great but it took the WBC a long time to get over the embarrassment.

Brute wrote:

perfect jet wrote:How times have changed Brute :)

I think you will find the IBF now have a rule whereby a fighter coming off a loss can't contest a title. Outside optional defenses,you need to contest a #1 and #2 elimination bout to fight the champion.

Best of the lot was in 1975 when Venezuelan Luis "Lumumba" Estaba KOed Paraguayan "contender" Rafael Lovera in four one sided rounds for the vacant WBC light flyweight title.

After the fight it was found that Lovera's management had submitted a record of "phantoms" as his record. Lovera had never had a fight in his life!

Estaba went on to establish himself as a light flyweight great but it took the WBC a long time to get over the embarrassment.

For real? that's unforgivable. what a doozie

think OFs initial post ws spot on to be honest.

JSA wrote:think OFs initial post ws spot on to be honest.

Smiley hair-tearing aside, this thread has been a fantastic read, thanks guys!

It's nice to know boxing fans all over the world are clued-up, it kind of somehow makes you feel a bit brighter about another promoter pulling the wool over your eyes for a glorified European title fight in a leisure centre in Portsmouth when you know there's boxing fans in Woolloongabba rolling their eyes about exactly the same thing.

get a dog up ya

toppity wrote:get a dog up ya

What does that even mean?

Seeking some cultural exchange, that's all.

it means, more or less, 'go and get f#cked'

it was in reference to Datsue's comment that stated my hair-tearing smiley wasn't fantastic.

all in good spirit of course

toppity wrote:it means, more or less, 'go and get f#cked'

it was in reference to Datsue's comment that stated my hair-tearing smiley wasn't fantastic.

all in good spirit of course

I suppose bothering to explain that what I meant by "Smiley hair-tearing aside" was "Apart from the boring bits of the thread where you guys & Oliver go at it for the umpteenth time" would be pointless, wouldn't it?

Fvck you all, I'm off.

Datsue wrote:

toppity wrote:it means, more or less, 'go and get f#cked'

it was in reference to Datsue's comment that stated my hair-tearing smiley wasn't fantastic.

all in good spirit of course

I suppose bothering to explain that what I meant by "Smiley hair-tearing aside" was "Apart from the boring bits of the thread where you guys & Oliver go at it for the umpteenth time" would be pointless, wouldn't it?

Fvck you all, I'm off.

"get a dog up ya'. I prefer the more creative "get a big black alsation up ya".

dont tear your hair out mate.Just an opinion. While i can see the points made abouut advertising the fight and trying to get as much media attention etc ...pllaying on the gereral publics relative ignorance of boxing that saying '3 world titlees etc" may add to thhe "substance"of thhe fight.Supposedly!
To me i have a bit more faith in the average aussie sportsfan.Numerous times when i have been at thhe pub watching a fight and someone who is clearly a very very casual fight fan i overhear saying how shit it is that there are all these "world" titles.
While technically Green is a 3 weight division world champ that in itself means nothing to mee because of the simple fact that in each division there are 6+world champs and too many divisions.If they are using that as a mainstay of their advertising campaign then that saddens me becauuse to me greeeen is green and roy is(/was)roy. its as annoying as the Mundane dribble.
Or are you just annoyed top coz i agreeed with OF.

JSA wrote:"get a dog up ya'. I prefer the more creative "get a big black alsation up ya".

dont tear your hair out mate.Just an opinion. While i can see the points made abouut advertising the fight and trying to get as much media attention etc ...pllaying on the gereral publics relative ignorance of boxing that saying '3 world titlees etc" may add to thhe "substance"of thhe fight.Supposedly!
To me i have a bit more faith in the average aussie sportsfan.Numerous times when i have been at thhe pub watching a fight and someone who is clearly a very very casual fight fan i overhear saying how poop it is that there are all these "world" titles.
While technically Green is a 3 weight division world champ that in itself means nothing to mee because of the simple fact that in each division there are 6+world champs and too many divisions.If they are using that as a mainstay of their advertising campaign then that saddens me becauuse to me greeeen is green and roy is(/was)roy. its as annoying as the Mundane dribble.
Or are you just annoyed top coz i agreeed with OF.

both

it has been a good topic though

indeed it has. I just cant wait for the fight.Think even at 40 Jones is at another level compared to mundine but green at a healthy weight and assuming he brings his mongrel.....reckon it willl be a corker. Just got a bad feeling about a nasty body shot(s) being greens nemesis. Chin will be ok but just got bad vibes from watching Beyer 2 again. Hmmmmmmmmmmm

Datsue wrote:

toppity wrote:it means, more or less, 'go and get f#cked'

it was in reference to Datsue's comment that stated my hair-tearing smiley wasn't fantastic.

all in good spirit of course

I suppose bothering to explain that what I meant by "Smiley hair-tearing aside" was "Apart from the boring bits of the thread where you guys & Oliver go at it for the umpteenth time" would be pointless, wouldn't it?

Fvck you all, I'm off.

To use a Aus-relevant comparison, what if Katsidis does get the Marquez fight? How would the PR men hype Marquez? If he's "merely" a three-weight world champion, then he's "only" of Green's standard...

Now, Marquez IS a three-weight world champion, and among P4P rankings. Typically you have to be of that standard to win three genuine world titles in different divisions. I think that's why I took particular exception to this line about Green, because it makes him out to be a modern great (in international terms). I wouldn't have a problem even with him being labelled as a current world champion for the purposes of this individual fight. It's par for the course and I guess I'm numbed to it. It's just the trumpeting of the three weights was excessive.

Marquez is what you think of when you think of three-weight world champions; someone who's been in with the likes of Mayweather, Pacquaio, Barrera, Casamayor, etc. Green, meanwhile, has been in with Beyer, Lucas, Drews and Mundine, and has lost more than he's won from that roll call.

Now, please, I'm not running down Green personally here, before anyone jumps on that last sentence. He is obviously world class and a strong, exciting challenge for Jones. But it does show the difference between an ACTUAL three-weight world champion, and a "three-weight world champion" for the purposes of hyping a fight. (Which would still sell out if there was a replica WWE belt from Toys-R-Us on the line).