Toney-Peter 2: Good For Boxing?

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

Despite a pre-fight notice that the winner of the Samuel Peter – James Toney fight Sept. 2 would get a shot at the WBC “world” title, the WBC issued a press release Sept. 26 announcing a requirement that Peter must meet Toney in a rematch despite capturing a split decision victory in their first match. [details]

[j]

very nice article. i completely agree on all points.

[GunStar]

It's another Toney hater "JE Grant" article!

[Mr. Ryan]

I really enjoyed this article. You see, that's how you do it. Also, props to him for having the patience to read a presser. I always discard them as propaganda.

[Bozo_no no]

Toney was robbed in the fight, and an overwhelming majority of the boxing world (fans and media) thought so.

The WBC went wrong when it announced it would grant Maskaev a nothing fight in December in Russia.

This is the best move for the division and the fans. It was the right call.

[grayfist]

One of the better decisions of the WBC. God knows there haven't been enough of the sort coming from the alphabet boys.

[psychopath]

Nah I don't believe it's good for the sport, It's only good for WBC.

This organization has shown poor judgement over and over again. It is very notorious in stripping out their CHAMPS with their titles for very shallow reason.

It could have been better if they let Peter fight for the title while asking Toney to make another fight against another contender. If Toney wins then a rematch with Peter could be in order.

Peter already earned his rigth to fight for the belt irregardless how controversial it may have been.

[Bozo_no no]

The real problem many of you seem to have is the WBC allowing Maskaev to tie up the title for 6 months with a meaningless fight agaisnt a scrub.

[joeytrimble]

wheres this guys thread on how bad it is for boxing when don king and duvas were buying the judges off ?

[monkeyboy]

I agree with the last three posts. WBC are covering their pathetic asses. Their ground rules were fulfilled by the bout whether the decision was disputable or not.
This is judging by media. It encourages dispute of all judging if it goes against the popular fighter. Organisations need to tighten up their judging qualifications and introduce examination and if necessary, disciplinary measures into ANY panel that has such a disparate points difference in a fight. As long as public opinion makes that much difference you may as well just say that a popular fighter can't lose on points.
As to Maskaev and Valuev facing nobodies, how can you justify a champion facing a contender who is not even ranked top ten. Standardized ranking points are needed to clarify positions and encourage more than one fight a year (if lucky). If you can't even fight your way into the top ten you certainly don't deserve a title shot.