BoxRec

http://www.fightnews.com/Boxing/roy-jon ... ore-311505

It's hilarious!

"T.M.K"

Have the WBA attempted to justify this?

They are fighting for the regular title, not super.

Does anybody have a link to WBA price list ? I would like to purchase a title. Can I do it online ?

They both aren't even ranked in WBA's top-15, and WBA already has 2 "champions" in this division. It's beyond ridiculous.

WTF? Wba is a disgrace... fornicating BAN the "Super" Title!!! And let only the regular to saffice.. (Downgrade Super champions to regular and regular to nothing)

With only 29 easy payments of $49.99 you too can become a WBA Regular Champion.

Merely send the money to the WBA via paypal and they will match you with any family member for a title fight. Grandparents and sisters included.

If you want a Super Title it's 49 easy payments of $89.99, but must be against a male opponent under 60. The WBA does have it's standards.

johnswan1 wrote:They are fighting for the regular title, not super.

Why comment if you can't even comprehend an article ?

What i love is how some posters here claim Golovkin never made 15 defenses of his WBA title, because there "was a higher super champion above him" and he needed that "SUPER" title .


The WBVA Super champion title has no historical relevance whatsoever, and this farce further proves it, if it ever needed proving.

crow wrote:

johnswan1 wrote:They are fighting for the regular title, not super.

Why comment if you can't even comprehend an article ?

What i love is how some posters here claim Golovkin never made 15 defenses of his WBA title, because there "was a higher super champion above him" and he needed that "SUPER" title .


The WBVA Super champion title has no historical relevance whatsoever, and this farce further proves it, if it ever needed proving.

If there is a Super champion then he will always supersede a Regular champion. GGG defenses are below those of former fighters as many of those he held a Regular title only, when a Super title from the same body existed, and hence it must be discounted in a historical sense.

johnswan1 wrote:

crow wrote:

johnswan1 wrote:They are fighting for the regular title, not super.

Why comment if you can't even comprehend an article ?

What i love is how some posters here claim Golovkin never made 15 defenses of his WBA title, because there "was a higher super champion above him" and he needed that "SUPER" title .


The WBVA Super champion title has no historical relevance whatsoever, and this farce further proves it, if it ever needed proving.

If there is a Super champion then he will always supersede a Regular champion. GGG defenses are below those of former fighters as many of those he held a Regular title only, when a Super title from the same body existed, and hence it must be discounted in a historical sense.

Damn right. Golovkin (when compared to Hopkins, Hagler, Monzon) only counts as WBA champ from early 2013

Col/T.M.K

T.M.K wrote:
Damn right. Golovkin (when compared to Hopkins, Hagler, Monzon) only counts as WBA champ from early 2013

Col/T.M.K

On your period again ?

By the way, i've just read the WBVA "SUPER" Champion belt can be awarded to a boxer THAT DOESN'T EVEN OWN THE REGULAR WBVA TITLE in that weight class

The WBA refers to a champion who holds two or more of these titles in the same weight class as an "undisputed champion" or "super champion". This applies even if the WBA title is not one of the titles held by the "undisputed champion".[7][8] In September 2008, Nate Campbell was recognized as lightweight "undisputed champion" for his WBO and IBF titles, while the WBA's own champion was Yusuke Kobori. (proof: http://boxrec.com/title/WBASUP?division=Lightweight[9]

.

Their own guidelines state: "The WBA SUPER WORLD CHAMPION or UNDISPUTED CHAMPION is a World Champion who holds two or more World Titles of the leading sanctioning bodies (WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO). "
http://web.archive.org/web/200806051843 ... onship.htm

Which further proves "REGULAR WBVA" and "SUPER WBVA" have no direct relevance whatsoever : the "SUPER" title is simply a greedy fabrication purely destined to amass additional sanctionning fees.

But Golovkin was not even the recognised WBA champ until he had already made ten defenses of his crappy Regular title. So those defenses don't really count, unless you are already counting Daniel Jacobs at 2 successful defenses of his regular WBA title?

Why do people even try and figure out the WBA title situation?
The belt has been worthless for years.Throw the thing in the trash and don;t recognize any
of their champions.
This is just further proof positive of their corruption

crow wrote:

T.M.K wrote:
Damn right. Golovkin (when compared to Hopkins, Hagler, Monzon) only counts as WBA champ from early 2013

Col/T.M.K

On your period again ?

By the way, i've just read the WBVA "SUPER" Champion belt can be awarded to a boxer THAT DOESN'T EVEN OWN THE REGULAR WBVA TITLE in that weight class

The WBA refers to a champion who holds two or more of these titles in the same weight class as an "undisputed champion" or "super champion". This applies even if the WBA title is not one of the titles held by the "undisputed champion".[7][8] In September 2008, Nate Campbell was recognized as lightweight "undisputed champion" for his WBO and IBF titles, while the WBA's own champion was Yusuke Kobori. (proof: http://boxrec.com/title/WBASUP?division=Lightweight[9]

.

Their own guidelines state: "The WBA SUPER WORLD CHAMPION or UNDISPUTED CHAMPION is a World Champion who holds two or more World Titles of the leading sanctioning bodies (WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO). "
http://web.archive.org/web/200806051843 ... onship.htm

Which further proves "REGULAR WBVA" and "SUPER WBVA" have no direct relevance whatsoever : the "SUPER" title is simply a greedy fabrication purely destined to amass additional sanctionning fees.

Period? Have no idea what you are on about.

Secondly, Mr Crow, the point is that 2 boxers defeated by Lebedev, will be competing for a title which is the highest WBA belt going, and supercedes the belt Lebedev holds. We know they are not violating their own rules - we are just laughing at how stupid the rules are.

Many thanks

Col/T.M.K

WBA have let themselves down again but that aside I'm strangely fascinated by this matchup

T.M.K wrote:
Period? Have no idea what you are on about.

My idea is that many here, including you and fergusg/tiny acres, deny Gennady his just due in the sport by downplaying the importance of the WBA title.

Gennady is the direct holder of the same title Hagler and Hearns fought for, and the ridiculous rules establishing the "SUPER" WBA titles do as much to devalue it as they would the current and past IBF and WBC ones (which is zlich).

There is no base to deny his 15 successive defenses .

Neither could the argument " he fought nobody" during that reign intervene: Wikipedia mentions for Wilfredo Gomez that "His seventeen consecutive knockouts in championship defenses is a record for all boxing divisions" yet it's well known he faced often very poor competition in order to establish it. And he never held the undisputed super bantam either.

Likewise, Joe Louis' "bum of the month" 25 successive defenses still rank as the record in HW title fights, and nobody would dream of scratching it from the record books because the adversaries were often below par.

So, please, enough with your childish arguments and alts.

Gennady is going to smash Gomez' successive KO's title defenses, then Hopkins's number of middle defenses, and you'll be able to watch it to your satisfaction and everyone's elses.

crow wrote:

T.M.K wrote:
Period? Have no idea what you are on about.

My idea is that many here, including you and fergusg/tiny acres, deny Gennady his just due in the sport by downplaying the importance of the WBA title.

Gennady is the direct holder of the same title Hagler and Hearns fought for, and the ridiculous rules establishing the "SUPER" WBA titles do as much to devalue it as they would the current and past IBF and WBC ones (which is zlich).

There is no base to deny his 15 successive defenses .

Neither could the argument " he fought nobody" during that reign intervene: Wikipedia mentions for Wilfredo Gomez that "His seventeen consecutive knockouts in championship defenses is a record for all boxing divisions" yet it's well known he faced often very poor competition in order to establish it. And he never held the undisputed super bantam either.

Likewise, Joe Louis' "bum of the month" 25 successive defenses still rank as the record in HW title fights, and nobody would dream of scratching it from the record books because the adversaries were often below par.

So, please, enough with your childish arguments and alts.

Gennady is going to smash Gomez' successive KO's title defenses, then Hopkins's number of middle defenses, and you'll be able to watch it to your satisfaction and everyone's elses.

I recognize the fighter not their worthless belt.
And why are we even discussing GGG? This topic has nothing to do with him.
Do I recognize GGG as tge middleweight champion? Well hell yes I do.
Do I bother to recognize his bullshit WBA belt? No.
Because it is a joke of an organization.
Chill out dude you will live longet

tiny_acres wrote:
I recognize the fighter not their worthless belt.
And why are we even discussing GGG? This topic has nothing to do with him.
Do I recognize GGG as tge middleweight champion? Well hell yes I do.
Do I bother to recognize his bullshit WBA belt? No.
Because it is a joke of an organization.
Chill out dude you will live longet

Keep posting long and hard enough ( but chilled) how much you don't care about the WBA belts , and i'm sure one day we'll start believing you, fergusg.

Golovkin only became a credible world champion after he beat Macklin.

crow wrote:

tiny_acres wrote:
I recognize the fighter not their worthless belt.
And why are we even discussing GGG? This topic has nothing to do with him.
Do I recognize GGG as tge middleweight champion? Well hell yes I do.
Do I bother to recognize his bullshit WBA belt? No.
Because it is a joke of an organization.
Chill out dude you will live longet

Keep posting long and hard enough ( but chilled) how much you don't care about the WBA belts , and i'm sure one day we'll start believing you, fergusg.

Oh I love how I have been called everyone from Ferg to Rover to cheepa

I am not any other former or current poster.

But I would still like a response as to how this turned into a GGG thread

tiny_acres wrote:Oh I love how I have been called everyone from Ferg to Rover to cheepa

Ouch!

You poor man. :(

Horse wrote:

tiny_acres wrote:Oh I love how I have been called everyone from Ferg to Rover to cheepa

Ouch!

You poor man. :(

Thank you.
I would think I have been here long enough to develop my own warped personality and not be grouped as one of them.

tiny_acres wrote:Thank you.
I would think I have been here long enough to develop my own warped personality and not be grouped as one of them.

Maybe you just need to be more of an arse, so when people want to insult you they'll say that you are acting even more like tiny_acres than normal, rather than saying you are like someone else.

It works for me.

Horse wrote:

tiny_acres wrote:Thank you.
I would think I have been here long enough to develop my own warped personality and not be grouped as one of them.

Maybe you just need to be more of an arse, so when people want to insult you they'll say that you are acting even more like tiny_acres than normal, rather than saying you are like someone else.

It works for me.

I'll try harder