BoxRec

Well, hear me out on this one before you all jump on my back. I follow Lucas on Instagram, always respected the guy and he is very active on this aspect of social media. I questioned him by open message when he mentioned 'winning his world title'... as he was referring to his WBF tilt against Toney. I simply suggested he was not being realistic in believing that he was in fact a world champion. His response surprised me.... he does recognise himself as a world champion, because I am not a boxer he suggests I am not entitled to an opinion, he questioned how many 'legends of the sport' I had beaten?.............

Obviously I explained to him that Toney was many many years and about 5 stone past his best and stated that Lucas was a contender to the title with a punchers chance of being people. His boxing skills are very limited as far as I'm concerned.

All Im suggesting is that these fighters who use social media as a platform to augment their fan base should realise they are open to criticism for some of the stuff they spout. We are entitled to know about 'the game'..... personally I have not boxed at anything above schoolboy level but I do consider myself to be relatively knowledgeable about the sport I love, and other sports for that matter.

So, if you read this Mr Browne, you are not world champion. Your beating of a legend of the sport in James 'lights out' Toney is about the equivalent to me slapping Muhammad Ali and claiming to be 'the greatest'.

People are allowed opinions, even if you don't agree with them. if you don't like social Media feedback then don't engage in it.....simples!

We don't all have to blow smoke up everyone's ar$e!

Yeah, as far as I'm concerned if these paper title guys want to believe they are a world champ then fine, it probably makes them feel good and all. Just don't expect people not to call you out on it.

People like Alex Arthur and Nate Cleverly will probably always believe they were 'world champion' at one point. Nice little fantasy world for them, but noone else is playing along.

Just wondering do you consider Sergey Kovalev as world champion? He holds the same belt as 'Nate' Cleverly

Marlo Stanfield wrote:Just wondering do you consider Sergey Kovalev as world champion? He holds the same belt as 'Nate' Cleverly

Surely we can recognise there is a difference between WBO and the fornicating WBF though??!!

Yes definitely. I wasn't commenting on the OP just the post about Cleverly

Marlo Stanfield wrote:Just wondering do you consider Sergey Kovalev as world champion? He holds the same belt as 'Nate' Cleverly

And the point missing begins

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Marlo Stanfield wrote:Just wondering do you consider Sergey Kovalev as world champion? He holds the same belt as 'Nate' Cleverly

And the point missing begins

You've failed to answer my question. Is Kovalev in a fantasy world thinking that he's a world champion?

As long as I have a hole in my arse I will never recognise the WBF or any organisation like it as a genuine world title; I still struggle with the idea that the WBO carries the same level of kudos as the more established 3...

The WBA may be one of the established 4 but its becoming an utter joke.
Silver champions, Regular Champions, Super Champions, Continental, Intercontinental, International, yadda yadda. FFS.

Clint Magnum wrote:The WBA may be one of the established 4 but its becoming an utter joke.
Silver champions, Regular Champions, Super Champions, Continental, Intercontinental, International, yadda yadda. FFS.

Granted. The IBF went through the Lee scandal and WBC have long been under the Sulaiman grip.

The truth of the matter is that all sanctioning bodies are rotten and tarnished to a greater or lesser extent but we have to draw the line somewhere - for my money if I was an elite level boxer I would only ever be fully satisfied at the point that I held either the WBC, WBA or IBF titles.

If Browne was any sort of student of the game he would be embarrassed to try and pass off the WBF as a genuine world crown...

TerribleTerry wrote:

Clint Magnum wrote:The WBA may be one of the established 4 but its becoming an utter joke.
Silver champions, Regular Champions, Super Champions, Continental, Intercontinental, International, yadda yadda. FFS.

Granted. The IBF went through the Lee scandal and WBC have long been under the Sulaiman grip.

The truth of the matter is that all sanctioning bodies are rotten and tarnished to a greater or lesser extent but we have to draw the line somewhere - for my money if I was an elite level boxer I would only ever be fully satisfied at the point that I held either the WBC, WBA or IBF titles.

If Browne was any sort of student of the game he would be embarrassed to try and pass off the WBF as a genuine world crown...

Why the WBC, WBA, or IBF but no WBO?

crusader wrote:

TerribleTerry wrote:

Clint Magnum wrote:The WBA may be one of the established 4 but its becoming an utter joke.
Silver champions, Regular Champions, Super Champions, Continental, Intercontinental, International, yadda yadda. FFS.

Granted. The IBF went through the Lee scandal and WBC have long been under the Sulaiman grip.

The truth of the matter is that all sanctioning bodies are rotten and tarnished to a greater or lesser extent but we have to draw the line somewhere - for my money if I was an elite level boxer I would only ever be fully satisfied at the point that I held either the WBC, WBA or IBF titles.

If Browne was any sort of student of the game he would be embarrassed to try and pass off the WBF as a genuine world crown...

Why the WBC, WBA, or IBF but no WBO?

Probably my age mate - when I was first into the sport the WBO didn't exist and its early incarnation saw some dreadful titliest (Damiani at heavy) mixed in with good ones (Moorer at light heavy)

The US boxing press (who influenced me heavily as a young fan) were very dismissive of the WBO and I guess that has stayed with me.

Anyone else view the WBO belt as just a step below the other 3 or am I on my own with this one...

I can see that, but I think their quality of champions is now comparable to the other major 3 and they don't seem any more corrupt or unreasonable.

The problem with today's version of boxing... is that fighters can accomplish so very little, and be rewarded with so much... granted, even in this piss poor division, I cant see Browne as any sort of champion--- just because you beat Toney, doesnt mean anything. It would of mattered, say, ten years ago. But not now. However--- with all the super duper diamond titalnium alloy championship belts out there--- whose to say in some political world, that Browne wont be the next man in line to face Stiverne or Klitschko, etc.

However---- I do not like the comment I hear from every fighter, when they are criticized: "I'm a fighter, you're not, so therefore you're opinion is nothing," when it is MY MONEY, MY TIME, and MY INTEREST that pays your damn bills and makes you a superstar boxer. My opinion does count--- and it weighs far more than yours--- otherwise you would be out digging ditches in the Outback.

Ya, the good old ad hominem seems to be used endlessly in boxing. Probably goes with a lot of fighters not being very educated....

By similar logic most boxers shouldn't criticize the work of boxing writers.

I did mention to him that he should value public opinions..... as its us that pay his wages.

out of interest... my instagram name is oneillbox

brownes instagram name is lucasbigdaddybrowne

feel free to peruse the altercation, then ask yourself...... how many legends of the sport have you beaten? ...

personally, and not blowing my own trumpet, I think I could kick the arse of ali and frazier one after another (not holmes or foreman.....still dangerous...ha ha), that would put me up above anyone else in boxing, according to lucas browne!!

think ill throw this debate onto the aussie forum....for a giggle..

TerribleTerry wrote:"crusader"]

TerribleTerry wrote:

Clint Magnum wrote:The WBA may be one of the established 4 but its becoming an utter joke.
Silver champions, Regular Champions, Super Champions, Continental, Intercontinental, International, yadda yadda. FFS.

Granted. The IBF went through the Lee scandal and WBC have long been under the Sulaiman grip.

The truth of the matter is that all sanctioning bodies are rotten and tarnished to a greater or lesser extent but we have to draw the line somewhere - for my money if I was an elite level boxer I would only ever be fully satisfied at the point that I held either the WBC, WBA or IBF titles.

If Browne was any sort of student of the game he would be embarrassed to try and pass off the WBF as a genuine world crown...

Why the WBC, WBA, or IBF but no WBO?

Probably my age mate - when I was first into the sport the WBO didn't exist and its early incarnation saw some dreadful titliest (Damiani at heavy) mixed in with good ones (Moorer at light heavy)

The US boxing press (who influenced me heavily as a young fan) were very dismissive of the WBO and I guess that has stayed with me.

Anyone else view the WBO belt as just a step below the other 3 or am I on my own with this one...[/quote]


Yes I'm the same although I tend to disregard most of the titles now and look at the fight itself.

WBO was kind of bolstered by Barerra, Moorer, Eubank and de la Hoya etc having the titles and showing up holding the belt. It even looked cheap in comparrison back in the 90s. They are all self serving crooks IMO. The mags back then always referred to 'the big 3'. Now it's four.

Marlo Stanfield wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Marlo Stanfield wrote:Just wondering do you consider Sergey Kovalev as world champion? He holds the same belt as 'Nate' Cleverly

And the point missing begins

You've failed to answer my question. Is Kovalev in a fantasy world thinking that he's a world champion?

A really good question.

I agree Rhino. Lucas beat a shell of James Toney.

Its laughable that he considers himself world champion.

He has world class power but is extremely ponderous.

He hasn't beaten a significant contender in my opinion and will be demolished as soon as he faces anyone with a hint of boxing ability

Browne seems like one of the best & most genuine guys in boxing.

I suspect he just wasn't in the mood to debate the tedious, complex & farcical nature of boxing politics with some random guy on the internet (he probably has better things to do than us, haha!).

He's as much a world champion as the next fighter holding some meaningless trinket. Personally I couldn't give a fvck about world titles, I only rate a boxer on his performances & ability, not on what belts he holds.

But if Browne takes them seriously, then who are we to argue?

Marlo Stanfield wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Marlo Stanfield wrote:Just wondering do you consider Sergey Kovalev as world champion? He holds the same belt as 'Nate' Cleverly

And the point missing begins

You've failed to answer my question. Is Kovalev in a fantasy world thinking that he's a world champion?

If Kovalev is the best light heavyweight in the world, it isn't because he took a paper title off Nathan Cleverly.

rhino222 wrote:
People are allowed opinions, even if you don't agree with them. if you don't like social Media feedback then don't engage in it.....simples!

We don't all have to blow smoke up everyone's ar$e!

I don't disagree.

However, if that upsets you then whatever you do don't message Paul Smith questioning his worthiness of a World Title shot ......

Surely in the same unrestricted way that fans are able to interact with professional sportsman, they should be able to reply to wind-up messages as they see fit?

I agree that every can have an opinion but if you give yours to others, how can you complain when they give theirs to you in return?

What exactly do you hope to achieve by belittling the WBF belt to one of their titlists?

Didn't Ricky Hatton hold a WBF belt on his way up the ladder?