BoxRec

Carl Thompson beating Rochigiani in Germany also.

stujones wrote:It was Beyer in Germany wasn't it?

Your right Stu, Lucas was the eliminator. My bad.

Ok now i know it was a vacant title, but Dennis Andries beating Tony Willis in America for the WBC title.
Plus Dennis did win the WBC title again abroad in Australia against Jeff Harding. Niether of these wins come under beating a top american though.

please say thats right Stu

SamWise72 wrote:

JLP wrote:

Terminator666 wrote:Nigel Benn won his first world title in the states (WBO) though.

The WBO wasn't a big belt until 2004, so I deliberately omitted Nigel's conquest of DeWitt. I didn't class Nigel as legit world champion at the time.

The WBO isn't a big belt NOW. I don't know who decided the big three were a big four, but the WBO's standards are even lower than the others. Junior title.

In 2004 the WBO decided to allow their champions to fight for the "big three" belts and this encouraged a better quality of fighter to take part in championship matches sanctioned by them. I think that's when the WBO belt gained greater recognition. Ultimately, the champion makes the belt.

Jack B wrote:

JLP wrote:I'd forgotten about Khan. As has been pointed out above, Ricky won the vacant title.

Incorrect. Collazo held the title. He won the WBA paper belt when Judah was unified champion. But when Judah lost to Baldomir (WBC title on the line only) he was stripped by WBA, therefore upgrading Collazo. Definitely not vacant though.

And yes, I am a sad bastard.

Yep you're right, well done

Benn beat Galvano away from home for the WBC super middleweight crown in 1992

Hope Brook does it but I think he'll be up against it away from home. He'll have to win very conclusively to get any decision and his performance against Carston Jones makes me think he's not as good as he thinks he is. Make no mistake, Alexander is a big step up from anything Brook has been in with before and I favour him quite strongly.

JLP wrote:

SamWise72 wrote:
The WBO wasn't a big belt until 2004, so I deliberately omitted Nigel's conquest of DeWitt. I didn't class Nigel as legit world champion at the time.

The WBO isn't a big belt NOW. I don't know who decided the big three were a big four, but the WBO's standards are even lower than the others. Junior title.

In 2004 the WBO decided to allow their champions to fight for the "big three" belts and this encouraged a better quality of fighter to take part in championship matches sanctioned by them. I think that's when the WBO belt gained greater recognition. Ultimately, the champion makes the belt.[/quote]

I agree, and rarely does the WBO have a champion who can be considered the best in the division. If you look at the runs of opponents people have, it's often like a sort of senior European title (or perhaps it's just what the european title should be). I know the other organisations are pretty shoddy too, but I'd say all of the big three consistently have better champs and better matchups.

Edit: Sorry, I've somehow screwed up the quote embedding. I've made two attempts to fix it, but my brain isn't working. We both know what we said :)