Worst Boxing Org/Sanctioning Body of 2015?

[Teddy05]

Yes, we are well aware that you do not care about facts, logic or reality. As far as I was aware though, BoxingScene covers the sport of boxing on Earth 1 and not in an alternate universe.

The IBF would have had a problem with Glazkov stepping aside since IBF rules do not allow step asides.

The IBF mandatory was due by November 15, 2015 (since Pulev had been the last mandatory on November 15, 2014).

The IBF, in an effort to encourage unified titles, allowed for the WBO mandatory (Fury) to take priority over their mandatory, ON THE CONDITION that the Klitschko/Fury winner agree to face Glazkov next.

They agreed.

Even though they agreed, they secretly negotiated a rematch clause, which they hid from the IBF.

So instead of facing Glazkov as he promised, Fury took a ***VOLUNTARY*** defense against Klitschko.

The IBF had no choice but to strip him. There was literally no way under the rules to not strip him without a very costly lawsuit resulting.

To criticize the IBF in this matter is absolutely ridiculous.

But I know, I know. You don't care. Facts don't matter to you.

Maybe we can find a boxing site that covers the alternate reality you live in so you can have the fantasy discussions you desire?

The fact they had scrubs in Glaskov and martin fighting for their belt in the first place is a disgrace

[aboutfkntime]

IBF had no choice but to strip Fury. IBF mandatory was overdue before Fury even fought for the title. There was no way to grant another voluntary.

So what ?

WHO..... FKN..... CARES ?

You, and Glazkov's mom, that's who..... and hard luck for both of you.

The IBF change/ignore their own rules whenever it suits them.

So, we missed out on Fury/Glazkov.....

WHO..... FKN..... CARES ?

Klitschko is the long-standing champ, he obviously deserves a rematch, especially considering the circumstances surrounding how that fight unfolded, and the manner of his loss.

You guys talk it, but really have no clue about the integrity of boxing.

Klitschko DESERVES that fight, Glazkov did not.

" DESERVES " = earned the right.

But, here is the main point that seems to be totally lost on you.....

Fury/Klitschko are likely the 2 best heavyweights on the planet..... Glazkov, on the other hand, is most definitely NOT the best heavyweight on the planet.

Why did you just recommend to me that the 2 best heavyweights on the planet be deferred for a lower-standard fight?

Why would you do that, you asshat ?

It is simply dumb, to somehow rank Glazkov/Martin over Fury/Klitschko.

#secondrate

[REMOVE SHARK 55]

IBF mandatory is due once a year at heavyweight. WTF are you talking about . . .

Tyson beat the 11 year reigning champ @ Heavyweight and was stripped immediately after because Wlad decided to exercise the rematch clause. Surely in any sane world you wait for the outcome of the rematch before enforcing an mandatory. Further more WTF you talking about? Don't quote me with your biased fan boy nonsense. You wanted to see Glazkov vs Fury instead. Pathetic little kid.

[original zero]

Teddy -

The WBO had Martin ranked #1 and the IBF had Glazkov ranked #1. The WBO had Glazkov ranked #4 and the IBF had Martin ranked #4. If the IBF was ranking scrubs, so was the WBO.

If Fury was refusing to make his mandatory defense, who exactly would be more qualified to fight for the vacant title than his two mandatories fighting each other?



About Time -

It is your OPINION that Klitschko "deserves" a rematch, but the rules of boxing don't allow it. It was a decisive victory for Fury. Klitschko was given a high IBF ranking and it would have been his turn again soon enough.

But Glazkov fought his eliminator and won. He is actually the one that earned the right and had the IBF broken their rules, they would have been sued.

If you believe Fury and Klitschko are the two best heavyweights, that is lovely. Klitschko likely would have been the next mandatory after Glazkov. However, Glazkov had already earned his shot and the rules did not allow for Klitschko to skip over him.

If your position was rooted in fact and logic, you wouldn't be resorting to name calling. That is a tell tale sign that you know your position is weak.



Student -

Fury was a mandatory and was under no obligation to agree to a rematch. He *voluntarily* agreed to a *VOLUNTARY* rematch.

The mandatory was already overdue. The IBF had no choice but to enforce the mandatory. Otherwise, Glazkov would have had an open and shut lawsuit against the IBF.

Hilarious that you label me a fanboy. I am not a fan of ANY of the fighters being discussed and couldn't care less who fights who.

I am stating indisputable fact. You can't counter my argument, so you're resorting to name calling and insults.

The facts are what they are. Has nothing to do with what I'd rather see. If it were up to me, boxing would be illegal.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Yes, we are well aware that you do not care about facts, logic or reality. As far as I was aware though, BoxingScene covers the sport of boxing on Earth 1 and not in an alternate universe.

The IBF would have had a problem with Glazkov stepping aside since IBF rules do not allow step asides.

The IBF mandatory was due by November 15, 2015 (since Pulev had been the last mandatory on November 15, 2014).

The IBF, in an effort to encourage unified titles, allowed for the WBO mandatory (Fury) to take priority over their mandatory, ON THE CONDITION that the Klitschko/Fury winner agree to face Glazkov next.

They agreed.

Even though they agreed, they secretly negotiated a rematch clause, which they hid from the IBF.

So instead of facing Glazkov as he promised, Fury took a ***VOLUNTARY*** defense against Klitschko.

The IBF had no choice but to strip him. There was literally no way under the rules to not strip him without a very costly lawsuit resulting.

To criticize the IBF in this matter is absolutely ridiculous.

But I know, I know. You don't care. Facts don't matter to you.

Maybe we can find a boxing site that covers the alternate reality you live in so you can have the fantasy discussions you desire?

Haha.

Wow.

Okay, then.

As a boxing fan, I DO NOT CARE about the IBF or the WBA or the WBC or the WBO or the IBA or the IBO or the IBC(isn't that a root beer?) or the WBU or the WBF or the numerous other sad alphabet creations over the years that have been brought about for no other reason than to make sanctioning fees and make a "world title" fight out of every single fight that comes along.

As a boxing fan, I hope for what is best for the sport. Four "world titles" (God, can they at least make them regional as we only live in ONE WORLD?) in 17 divisions(105, 108, 112, 115, 118, 122, 126, 130- EIGHT DIVISIONS in a span of TWENTY-FIVE POUNDS!) is NOT good for the sport.

The next time a friend asks you who the welterweight champion is, what will you say? Middleweight? Super Featherweight? Oh wait. They won't ask about the super featherweight division because what the hell is a super featherweight division to a person who assumes that each division has a unique name without supers or juniors? hey don't have this in the UFC. So it must be better. Right? (Not an assumption I agree with, but one that can honestly be made by a person who didn't know better)

And how about the heavyweight division? Who is the heavyweight champion? Pre-IBF strip, you could say, "Well, my friend, Tyson Fury is the champion and Deontay Wilder holds a belt. So he's a champion but Fury holds three of the belts. So he's the more highly regarded champion...at least by some. Some think Wilder is better."

The confusion is on the friend's face already, but maybe they can understand it.

Post-IBF strip, "Well, Fury has two of the belts, Wilder has one and Charles Martin has the other."

"So there are THREE HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPIONS?"

"Yeah. FOUR BELTS, though."

"Oh wow. UFC only has ONE HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION."

"Yeah. That's what I hear."

Crickets chirping.

You can get into the rules of these organizations all you want. You and both of the other fans who care can discuss this from here on out. It's a free country.

Any other boxing fan can easily point out the ridiculousness of this entire situation and not give one single Froch about why the IBF gave us Charles Martin as their champion and broke up the biggest prize in the sport yet again.

:blow::blow::blow:

[REMOVE SHARK 55]

Teddy -

The WBO had Martin ranked #1 and the IBF had Glazkov ranked #1. The WBO had Glazkov ranked #4 and the IBF had Martin ranked #4. If the IBF was ranking scrubs, so was the WBO.

If Fury was refusing to make his mandatory defense, who exactly would be more qualified to fight for the vacant title than his two mandatories fighting each other?



About Time -

It is your OPINION that Klitschko "deserves" a rematch, but the rules of boxing don't allow it. It was a decisive victory for Fury. Klitschko was given a high IBF ranking and it would have been his turn again soon enough.

But Glazkov fought his eliminator and won. He is actually the one that earned the right and had the IBF broken their rules, they would have been sued.

If you believe Fury and Klitschko are the two best heavyweights, that is lovely. Klitschko likely would have been the next mandatory after Glazkov. However, Glazkov had already earned his shot and the rules did not allow for Klitschko to skip over him.

If your position was rooted in fact and logic, you wouldn't be resorting to name calling. That is a tell tale sign that you know your position is weak.



Student -

Fury was a mandatory and was under no obligation to agree to a rematch. He *voluntarily* agreed to a *VOLUNTARY* rematch.

The mandatory was already overdue. The IBF had no choice but to enforce the mandatory. Otherwise, Glazkov would have had an open and shut lawsuit against the IBF.

Hilarious that you label me a fanboy. I am not a fan of ANY of the fighters being discussed and couldn't care less who fights who.

I am stating indisputable fact. You can't counter my argument, so you're resorting to name calling and insults.

The facts are what they are. Has nothing to do with what I'd rather see. If it were up to me, boxing would be illegal.

Don't play victim with me buddy. You chucked it @ me with your 'WTF' reply and I dished it right back. Pot, kettle.

My counter to your argument was in my first post. I'll copy and paste just for you.

'Tyson beat the 11 year reigning champ @ Heavyweight and was stripped immediately after because Wlad decided to exercise the rematch clause. Surely in any sane world you wait for the outcome of the rematch before enforcing an mandatory'.

I disagree it would have been an open and shut case. One thing it's done is open up the division so Tysons loss is every other HW's gain.

[original zero]

Anthony -

Nobody is telling you what to care about. You are free to care as much or as little as you'd like about anything you'd like.

The fact remains that the IBF had no choice but to strip Tyson Fury. Since you don't care about the IBF, this shouldn't bother you at all.

You've done a great job of explaining why people shouldn't watch boxing and guess what? Most don't. Many for the exact reasons you've given.

But none of that changes the fact that the IBF had no choice but to strip Tyson Fury. There was absolutely nothing in their rules that would allow for them to approve a voluntary defense against Wladimir Klitschko when the mandatory was overdue.



Student -

Dishing it back would be lovely except for the fact that you were completely wrong. The facts are 100% on my side, which is why you're getting so frustrated. I have no stake in any of this and couldn't care less about any of the involved parties. My only interest is the facts.

My argument is that the IBF had no choice but to strip Tyson Fury. Nothing you've written counters that argument. Go ahead. Read the IBF rules inside and out if you want. I have. Dozens of times. There's nothing in there that would allow for a voluntary defense against Klitschko.

It's unfortunate that the facts make you upset, but unlike Anthony, I'm unwilling to live in a fantasy land. Being the champion 11 years does not entitle you to an immediate rematch. He lost fair and square. Rematch clauses are strictly forbidden when a mandatory is due, which is why they hid the clause from the IBF.

[aboutfkntime]

About Time -

It is your OPINION that Klitschko "deserves" a rematch, but the rules of boxing don't allow it. It was a decisive victory for Fury. Klitschko was given a high IBF ranking and it would have been his turn again soon enough.

But Glazkov fought his eliminator and won. He is actually the one that earned the right and had the IBF broken their rules, they would have been sued.

If you believe Fury and Klitschko are the two best heavyweights, that is lovely. Klitschko likely would have been the next mandatory after Glazkov. However, Glazkov had already earned his shot and the rules did not allow for Klitschko to skip over him.

If your position was rooted in fact and logic, you wouldn't be resorting to name calling. That is a tell tale sign that you know your position is weak.

All of the organisations have different rules, and they all enforce/change those rules whenever they want.

TheRing doesn't even rank Glazkov in their top 10 at heavyweight.

I just think that Klitschko deserves his rematch more than Glazkov.

Glazkov is only ranked by 1 or 2 org's, and they don't have him at #1.

He's only really beaten Cunningham who probably should have stayed at cruiser.

Klitschko should not have to work his way back up at 40yo with his credentials..... you say that he would get his shot anyway, but how many of the 4+1 org's even rank Klitschko now?

Most likely very few rank him highly, despite him probably being the 2nd best heavyweight on the planet.

Klitschko and Fury both > Glazkov.

[original zero]

About Time -

Every org has the same rule on direct rematches: they are not recognized and they don't take precedence over a mandatory.

TBRB had Glazkov #7. Considering you have four orgs and the top fighters prefer the orgs that don't enforce their rules, you're not always going to get the very best in the division to agree to participate in the IBF's eliminators.

Glazkov agreed to participate and Glazkov won. So he earned the right to fight the IBF champion and that right was legally binding. The IBF had no way to approve a voluntary against Klitschko when the mandatory was overdue. The IBF would have been sued for millions of dollars and the IBF would have lost.

The funny thing is that Klitschko was given the #3 ranking after his loss (#2 was vacant), meaning it would have been Glazkov vs Klitschko for the vacant title. Klitschko turning down the title shot is what allowed Charles Martin to step in.

[aboutfkntime]

About Time -

Every org has the same rule on direct rematches: they are not recognized and they don't take precedence over a mandatory.

TBRB had Glazkov #7. Considering you have four orgs and the top fighters prefer the orgs that don't enforce their rules, you're not always going to get the very best in the division to agree to participate in the IBF's eliminators.

Glazkov agreed to participate and Glazkov won. So he earned the right to fight the IBF champion and that right was legally binding. The IBF had no way to approve a voluntary against Klitschko when the mandatory was overdue. The IBF would have been sued for millions of dollars and the IBF would have lost.

The funny thing is that Klitschko was given the #3 ranking after his loss (#2 was vacant), meaning it would have been Glazkov vs Klitschko for the vacant title. Klitschko turning down the title shot is what allowed Charles Martin to step in.

We have already done this....

WHO..... FKN..... CARES ?

It was Glazkov.

1) They choose what rules to enforce/change, and when

2) It's Glazkov..... Fury/Klitschko obviously > Glazkov.... so who cares ?

If you were sitting at a rail crossing waiting for the signal, and it changed green while the train was passing by..... would you proceed over the crossing..... just because the "rules" said so?

There is a place for common-sense my friend.

Those " rules " have been a running joke for years. No idea why the younger generation seem so fixated with that mindless fcukery now.

I don't care what your "rules" say..... Fury/Klitschko > Glazkov.

The IBF are a second-rate organisation, with a second-rate champ.

I hope you, and the IBF, are happy..... with Charles Martin.