"Tucci" <nothanks@invalidspammers.org> wrote in message news:1gqtn6bhpb8qu.21qe1nxx9jkd.dlg@40tude.net...> What are the main reasons the WBO is considered to be the least valid of> the boxing organizations?
In <1116878322.311258.325160@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> mwhaught@ excite.com wrote:> Tucci wrote:>> What are the main reasons the WBO is considered to be the least valid> of>> the boxing organizations?>
Its the youngest, least established, with little tradition or> historical markers during its time.>
The IBF gained quicker legitimacy with champs like Larry Holmes and> Marvin Hagler jumping on board early in its existance.
Wasn't Larry somewhat involved in the creation of the IBF?
Ulrich Mayring wrote:> Tucci wrote:>> What are the main reasons the WBO is considered to be the least valid of>> the boxing organizations?> Huh? There are many even less important organisations. The WBO is one of > the top four, at least.> Ulrich
The way the question was asked puts a little perspective on just how meaningless the IBO, IBC, etc. really are. They didn't even figure into the above question.
The way the question was asked puts a little perspective on just how > meaningless the IBO, IBC, etc. really are. They didn't even figure into > the above question.
Well, for the fighters making a modest living off IBO or IBC sanctioned fights this is not meaningless at all. The smaller organisations provide a venue for them and perhaps even a chance to work themselves up to a title fight for a bigger organisation.
In <1116956729.121923.241500@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> mwhaught@ excite.com wrote:> Ruddell wrote:
Wasn't Larry somewhat involved in the creation of the IBF?>>
I don't recall it that way.>
I do recall that WBA executives in the USA became angry with some> decisions regarding sanctioning of a Marvin Hagler fight. They > quickly formed a new sanctioning body (WBA/USA?) and immediately > crowned Marvin Hagler as their champ. Soon afterwards, they became > known as the International Boxing Federation (IBF) and crowned Larry > Holmes when he requested recognition (I think Larry had some issues > with sanctioning of a title fight he had signed for).>
Anywho, that is how I recall their coming to existance.
That could or likely is what happened. I thought Larry was actually involved with it, but maybe him being champ and recognizing it as a legit division was his contribution...
When's the last time you saw *anybody* not named > Sliphip (who was the son of the IBO prez, if I recall) defend the > legitimacy or importance of the IBO? or the WBF? When I call them > meaningless, sure, it's me saying so. But I think there's plenty of > precedent for that and plenty of support for that description.
Well, I seem to not understand what you mean by "meaningless"
We've established that these smaller organisations are meaningful for the fighters. There's also a number of fans, for whom they are meaningful (no fans, no card, no show, no belt). And for me, just because it says WBX title fight, that does not automatically make it meaningless. These may be two lesser skilled fighters, who could still put on a good show.
What *is* meaningless are claims of title holders that they are the best in the division, because they hold some belt. But that is often true for 3+1 title holders as well - they are not always the best and sometimes not even close.
