Should Wladimir Klitschko Be Awarded The Ring Belt By Default? [Archive]

pipe wrenched

09-09-2007, 10:57 AM

He’s already beaten the #2, which is the requirement for the Ring Heavyweight Title.

And it would seem the general concesus (hater's not included) that Wlad is head and shoulders above any competition out there. I've read long debates on ESB about who should even be his next opponent, as no one seems worthy or won't get badly killed in there. I say Wlad should have the ring belt. But atleast the Ring Championship is the only one that gets won/lost in the ring.:good

cross_trainer

09-09-2007, 11:02 AM

He's only beaten the #2 and #8 guys. Then again, the second-highest scorer (Chagaev) also has only two wins over top 10 guys.

Testament to the division's inactivity.

TheGoldenBoy#1

09-09-2007, 11:04 AM

who s number 2 in the ring rankings? Peter?

I said no. If It s peter it was what? 3 years ago that he beat him. Peter wasnt number 2 when Wlad beat him.

Illmatic

09-09-2007, 11:20 AM

thats not how it works. You win the Ring belt in the ring.

Mendoza

09-09-2007, 11:30 AM

He’s already beaten the #2, which is the requirement for the Ring Heavyweight Title.

While Wlad is the #1 heavy right now, I think he needs a title unification match. The winner of Ibragimov vs Holyfield could be ranked as high as #2 or #3. The winner of the match appears to be willing to fight Wlad. By Ring Magazine rules, if a #1 fights a #2 or #3, a new champion can be crowned in a time of vacancy.

However, the long shadow of Vitali Kiltschko's comeback looms. Vitlai was the last Ring Magazine champion. Vitlai should not be out of this discussion. If Vitlai beats McCline down, then cleans up on the winner of Maskev vs Peter, he could return as the Ring Magazine champion.

It is best to wait as many things can happen in the two years.

brooklyn1550

09-09-2007, 01:04 PM

No - once he beats another champion or beats Peter again he should

SevenSamurai

09-09-2007, 01:15 PM

Honestly if Vitali beats McCline he should have it, he retired with it and now he is back. Vitali Klitschko IS the rightfull Ring Magazine Champion.

Read the thread, it is about Wlad Klitschko.

SevenSamurai

09-09-2007, 01:26 PM

Marnoff

09-09-2007, 01:41 PM

I would say have a Klitschko vs. Peter rematch if Peter wins in his upcoming title shot. Then it would be a superfight.

kg0208

09-09-2007, 02:10 PM

Honestly if Vitali beats McCline he should have it, he retired with it and now he is back. Vitali Klitschko IS the rightfull Ring Magazine Champion.
Then if Lennox Lewis comes out of retirement, then he should get the Ring belt back right? That whole concept is ridiculous. He isn't the rightful Ring champion and never should have had it to begin with.

Illmatic

09-09-2007, 02:12 PM

The reason Wlad does not already have the ring belt, is due to the fact he is white and from europe rather than the fact that he has not beaten quality opposition. If Wlad was an Amercian and black and he had beaten the same people he would have the ring belt right now. Everyone knows that this is true.

:patsch The rules are as clear as day....to be ring champ a #1 must beat #2 or #3 in some instances. Whats so hard to comprehend? He wasnt #1 when he beat Peter and Peter wasnt#2 when they fought.

kg0208

09-09-2007, 02:14 PM

The reason Wlad does not already have the ring belt, is due to the fact he is white and from europe rather than the fact that he has not beaten quality opposition. If Wlad was an Amercian and black and he had beaten the same people he would have the ring belt right now. Everyone knows that this is true.

Ummm....thats IDIOTIC. He didn't beat the #2 guy when he was #1. Those are the rules? Should they make an exception so you don't think it's a race or nationality thing?

A-50

09-09-2007, 02:16 PM

Then if Lennox Lewis comes out of retirement, then he should get the Ring belt back right? That whole concept is ridiculous. He isn't the rightful Ring champion and never should have had it to begin with.

Why? Because you say so? Vitali Klitschko was the Ring Champion, deal with it. and he should be the Ring Champion since he is coming back and NEVER lost the belt. Lennox is not coming back.

kg0208

09-09-2007, 02:19 PM

:patsch The rules are as clear as day....to be ring champ a #1 must beat #2 or #3 in some instances. Whats so hard to comprehend? He wasnt #1 when he beat Peter and Peter wasnt#2 when they fought.

And that #3 is undisclosed special circumstances. Which were invoked for the OTHER Klitscho....so much for his little theory.

kg0208

09-09-2007, 02:21 PM

Why? Because you say so? Vitali Klitschko was the Ring Champion, deal with it. and he should be the Ring Champion since he is coming back and NEVER lost the belt. Lennox is not coming back.

Deal with this....show me the rule that says you can RETIRE for years and come back and simply reclaim it?

DEAL WITH THAT:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

And he should have never had the belt because he never beat the #2 guy. He beat the #3 guy and there were NO special circumstances involved. None whatsoever. He could have fought the #2 guy. Do you know the special circumstances? If not, the you simply look like the fool you are in every thread.

Mrboogie23

09-09-2007, 02:26 PM

No, I dont think so. He hasnt won it in the ring yet.

41fever

09-09-2007, 03:15 PM

4 his overly die hard fans...a resounding, YESSSS!!!!!!!!

SevenSamurai

09-09-2007, 03:24 PM

Ummm....thats IDIOTIC. He didn't beat the #2 guy when he was #1. Those are the rules? Should they make an exception so you don't think it's a race or nationality thing?

He has beaten the number two ranked heavweight Sam Peter, and he is universally recognised as the number one ranked heavyweight today. There is not one single heavweight out there, who be the favourite to beat him at the moment.

kg0208

09-09-2007, 03:31 PM

He has beaten the number two ranked heavweight Sam Peter, and he is universally recognised as the number one ranked heavyweight today. There is not one single heavweight out there, who be the favourite to beat him at the moment.

Was Peter #2 when he beat him? Was Wlad #1? Then you have your answer. Stop making up conspiracy to propogate your pro Euro stance.

Drew101

09-09-2007, 03:43 PM

Was Peter #2 when he beat him? Was Wlad #1? Then you have your answer. Stop making up conspiracy to propogate your pro Euro stance.

In fact, Wlad and Peter were only ranked in the lower reaches of the Top 10 when they first met. It was only when Wlad defeated Byrd that he jumped to #1, while Peter had to wait until he defeated Toney convincingly in the rematch to get to number two.

Anyway, Wlad's faced two fighters who have been ranked in the lower part of the Top 10 since winning the IBF title, so he hasn't fuflilled the criteria for becoming champion. Simple as that.

SevenSamurai

09-09-2007, 03:43 PM

Was Peter #2 when he beat him? Was Wlad #1? Then you have your answer. Stop making up conspiracy to propogate your pro Euro stance.

The answer to that question is no. But how can Wlad be expected to fight Sam Peter again just to win this ring belt, when his focus is on fighting the real beltholders and rightly so.

I know that an exception would be made for a American heavyweight champion who was in Wlad's position and who had done what he has done for the last 5 fights.

Drew101

09-09-2007, 03:51 PM

The answer to that question is no. But how can Wlad be expected to fight Sam Peter again just to win this ring belt, when his focus is on fighting the real beltholders and rightly so.

I know that an exception would be made for a American heavyweight champion who was in Wlad's position and who had done what he has done for the last 5 fights.

Well, if Wlad wants to become Ring Champion, he'll have to face the winner of Maskaev-Peter. Simple as that. And, since the winner of that fight will be WBC champion, then the two goals aren't mutually exclusive.

Anyway, there have been other cases of dominant fighters not fulfilling the criteria to become RING champion. If Pacquiao isn't champion at 130lbs, based on his performeces over the past few fights, then RING's sure as hell isn't going to crown Wlad champion, either.

kg0208

09-09-2007, 03:55 PM

The answer to that question is no. But how can Wlad be expected to fight Sam Peter again just to win this ring belt, when his focus is on fighting the real beltholders and rightly so.

I know that an exception would be made for a American heavyweight champion who was in Wlad's position and who had done what he has done for the last 5 fights.
Really? Prove it. You KNOW the exception would be made? Show me.

Winning the other titles is Wlad's goal? Good for him. He will still have to fight #2 because a belt holder will be #2 AFTER the Peter-Maskaev fight anyways. So again, he must beat #2.

Let me tell you what I KNOW. The policy says that #1 must face #2 or #3 under SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES but doesn't explain what those are.

You know the only 2 Ring titles I know of fought under unknown special circumstances between #1 and #3 bypassing #2. Vitali Klitscho over Corries Sanders (Euro) and Joe Calzaghe over Jeff Lacy (Euro).

So tell me again about this weird little conspiracy of yours?

Drew101

09-09-2007, 03:58 PM

Really? Prove it. You KNOW the exception would be made? Show me.

Let me tell you what I KNOW. The policy says that #1 must face #2 or #3 under SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES but doesn't explain what those are.

You know the only 2 Ring titles I know of fought under unknown special circumstances between #1 and #3 bypassing #2. Vitali Klitscho over Corries Sanders (Euro) and Joe Calzaghe over Jeff Lacy (Euro).

So tell me again about this weird little conspiracy of yours?

I think the Larios-Vasquez unification/RING championship was another case of #1 (Larios), fighting #3 (Vasquez)...but, that was an all-Mexican match, which only proves the point you were making.

kg0208

09-09-2007, 04:00 PM

I think the Larios-Vasquez unification/RING championship was another case of #1 (Larios), fighting #3 (Vasquez)...but, that was an all-Mexican match, which only proves the point you were making.

Yeah, that's one I didn't know of.

Claiming that if Wlad was American that it would suddenly be different is ridiculous.

Drew101

09-09-2007, 04:16 PM

Yeah, that's one I didn't know of.

Claiming that if Wlad was American that it would suddenly be different is ridiculous.

Oh, you're not going to get an argument from me on that point, kg. The RING may have made some interesting decisions in terms of their rankings, but they do apply the championship criteria in the same fashion, regardless of their nationality.

El Bombasto

09-09-2007, 04:35 PM

FUCK no. When all 4 belts are UNIFIED Ring may crown a champion.

are you using the same logic for all weight classes or just heavyweight?

KobeIsGod

09-09-2007, 05:01 PM

he hasn't met the ring champ requirements so no. But im pretty close to considering him the "Champ" since the belt holders are avoiding him but as of now, he is only the undisputed #1 hw . Only chance for unification is holyfield which is just plain sad cause I think he's the only one crzay enough to fight wald :yep

the hw non-unification situation is just so sad right now. no one will fight wlad and i dont blame them. who wants to lose their trinket and get ktfo?!? Im sure chagaev will fight some can like Julius Long for his first title defense :yep He never even mentioned wlad in an interview after resuming training. Wlad needs to pull a shannon briggs and start calling out these trinket holders like when shannon said wlad was in "the witness protection plan for boxing" :rofl

And if Peter wins, King and Duva will avoid wlad like the plague.

BewareofDawg

09-09-2007, 05:03 PM

FUCK no. When all 4 belts are UNIFIED Ring may crown a champion.
All 4? You're an idiot Dan :deal

AJAX

09-09-2007, 05:04 PM

Read the thread, it is about Wlad Klitschko.

and the ring belt and that's what were talking about. vitali retired with it and they havn't awarded it to anyone else. So untill they do i would think Vitali still has it

AJAX

09-09-2007, 05:06 PM

FUCK no. When all 4 belts are UNIFIED Ring may crown a champion.

that will likely never happen, so should we just throw the belt in the trash dumpster.?

KobeIsGod

09-09-2007, 05:10 PM

that will likely never happen, so should we just throw the belt in the trash dumpster.?

if wlad can unify one belt even the WBO, that would be enough for me to consider him undisputed. I don't think it is really viable to unify 3 or more anymore

Decker

09-09-2007, 05:15 PM

I think Wladimir should be awarded the Ring Belt if he unifys one of the titles. Doesnt matter which one, any of them. Or if he beats anyone within the Top 10, I would say give him the Ring Belt That's a good compromise. But Wlad will never do enough for the haters to recognize him as HW champ... and that's part of the hidden agenda of the unification fetish some posters have.

With the turf battles among the 4 orgs and promoters, etc. it will be very difficult to have one guy hold all 4 belts. And within a short time the 4 belts will get split up again. We're living in a different era - some just can't come to grips w/that.

kg0208 I won't dispute your RING mag ratings & champ posts as you seem like a knowledgeable fan, but Kings Randsom has a point. :think If Wlad was an American (any group) he might not be the official RING champ, but the US sports media would treat him like the HW champ. To use oft used ESB lingo - they would be nuthugging Wlad if he was an American.

TheGreat

09-10-2007, 12:34 AM

Hell no as he is simply yet another belt holder as for those who say he gets no love because he is euro, thats a complete pile of shit as Vitaly his older brother got the ring belt after losing to LL.

kg0208

09-10-2007, 12:37 AM

That's a good compromise. But Wlad will never do enough for the haters to recognize him as HW champ... and that's part of the hidden agenda of the unification fetish some posters have.

With the turf battles among the 4 orgs and promoters, etc. it will be very difficult to have one guy hold all 4 belts. And within a short time the 4 belts will get split up again. We're living in a different era - some just can't come to grips w/that.

kg0208 I won't dispute your RING mag ratings & champ posts as you seem like a knowledgeable fan, but Kings Randsom has a point. :think If Wlad was an American (any group) he might not be the official RING champ, but the US sports media would treat him like the HW champ. To use oft used ESB lingo - they would be nuthugging Wlad if he was an American.

Well the American media may do that, but let me point out that the German media has been treating both the Klitscho brothers like they were champs for years. So thats not really an indication of anything.

Dekkers

09-10-2007, 01:29 AM

Stupid, if he fights the 2 or 3 in the division give it to him, Peter wasn't that at the time they fought, you don't hand out ring belts retroactively :patsch

WiDDoW_MaKeR

09-10-2007, 01:34 AM

Let's not forget that not only does Wladimir have a win over the current #2 ranked Heavy by ring mag... but he also dominated, and knocked out Chris Byrd when Byrd was the #1 ranked heavy, by ring mag. So... I do think that he should be given the title. I don't see why he should have to beat Peter again... or wait for one of the others to finally fight him. It will be forever before a fight between Peter and Wlad could be made.

WiDDoW_MaKeR

09-10-2007, 01:41 AM

Stupid, if he fights the 2 or 3 in the division give it to him, Peter wasn't that at the time they fought, you don't hand out ring belts retroactively :patsch
Yes, but if you really think about it... Wlad and Peter were the top two contenders in the world and fought each other for a chance at fight Byrd. Wlad beat Peter, and then when on to knock out Byrd who was ranked #1 by ring mag. Which gave Wlad the #1 ranking. Peter then moves into the #2 ranking after a couple wins over Toney... while Wladimir was busy knocking out Calvin Brock, Ray Austin, and Lamon Brewster.

All of this happened within a year and a half. So, it isn't as if we are talking about a win from back in 1996. Considering that within that time span, Wlad beat the top contender, and then the #1 ranked heavy for the #1 spot, beat the current #2, and also beat top contenders Calvin Brock, Lamon Brewster, and his manditory Ray Austin... I don't understand any reason why he shouldn't be the ring champ.

thesandman

09-10-2007, 01:51 AM

Yes, but if you really think about it... Wlad and Peter were the top two contenders in the world and fought each other for a chance at fight Byrd. Wlad beat Peter, and then when on to knock out Byrd who was ranked #1 by ring mag. Which gave Wlad the #1 ranking. Peter then moves into the #2 ranking after a couple wins over Toney... while Wladimir was busy knocking out Calvin Brock, Ray Austin, and Lamon Brewster.

All of this happened within a year and a half. So, it isn't as if we are talking about a win from back in 1996. Considering that within that time span, Wlad beat the top contender, and then the #1 ranked heavy for the #1 spot, beat the current #2, and also beat top contenders Calvin Brock, Lamon Brewster, and his manditory Ray Austin... I don't understand any reason why he shouldn't be the ring champ.

18 months is 18 months, that's all.

You can't retrospectively hand people belts based on past victories, regardless of the time frame involved.

To hand Wald the belt now would be simply ignoring the WBA, WBC and WBO belt holders. That's mighty controversial IMO.

(Peter and Wald were not top contenders in the world when they fought - I'm assuming you're ignoring anyone that held a belt at the time????)

kg0208

09-10-2007, 01:52 AM

Yes, but if you really think about it... Wlad and Peter were the top two contenders in the world and fought each other for a chance at fight Byrd. Wlad beat Peter, and then when on to knock out Byrd who was ranked #1 by ring mag. Which gave Wlad the #1 ranking. Peter then moves into the #2 ranking after a couple wins over Toney... while Wladimir was busy knocking out Calvin Brock, Ray Austin, and Lamon Brewster.

All of this happened within a year and a half. So, it isn't as if we are talking about a win from back in 1996. Considering that within that time span, Wlad beat the top contender, and then the #1 ranked heavy for the #1 spot, beat the current #2, and also beat top contenders Calvin Brock, Lamon Brewster, and his manditory Ray Austin... I don't understand any reason why he shouldn't be the ring champ.

If a Klitshco was not involved you wouldn't even be arguing this.

codeman99998

09-10-2007, 03:28 AM

*sigh*

I remember having this discussion 9 months ago.

It is true that Wlad does not deserve the Ring Belt in the traditional understanding of what constitutes deserving of the belt. This is a given. When he beat Peter he and Peter weren't #1 and #2. So, he doesn't deserve the belt right?

Well, maybe. The problem is, the other belt holders, being that Wlad is CLEARLY head and shoulders above the rest, have a big long term financial interest in NOT fighting Wladimir. As long as they hold a HW title they can just hold on to that title for as long as possible and make as much money as possible off of that. Why should they lose their "championship" (and honestly, most of these guys, or at least their managers, have to know that they would PROBABLY lose) to Wladimir when they can keep making money off of their "championship" fights.

This becomes very clear with the case of Shannon Briggs. His team wanted no part of Wladimir, until they lost their ABC title, and then they were wanting to fight him (after all, Wlad means money, and with no ABC title to hold on to for future revenue it makes sense to want to fight him when you are NOT a champion.)

My position is this, Wladimir should be crowned the Ring champion, not necessarily because he "deserves it" but because people generally recognize the Ring champ as the legitimate champ. Suddenly, those ABC boys might lose a bit of their financial incentive to not fight Wlad when the fans don't clamor for their "fake" championships.

I want to see unification, and oddly, I think by declaring a champion now, we have the best chance of making everyone fight each other.

thesandman

09-10-2007, 03:41 AM

Lance_Uppercut

09-10-2007, 03:47 AM

It's quite simple. Peter was NOT # 2 when Wlad beat him, as others have pointed out. Anyone arguing against that is a fanboy.

codeman99998

09-10-2007, 03:49 AM

Codeman, I agree with the sentiment, but you can't put a policy in place for ANYTHING, and then just break it, well, because you want to.

I don't think giving Waldo the Ring belt will entice anyone to fight him. If a fighter has his abc belt, and the reason he doesn't want to fight Wald is because he (or his manager) thinks he will lose - that won't change a damn bit if the ring belt is involved.

If a fighter can make 3 easy ABC defences - then a shot at the Ring belt has to be worth more money than he can make in those 3 fights. I don't see the Ring belt attracting that kind of financial interest, it's something only pretty interested boxing fans know about.

That might be right.

I really, I just want unification in any way possible. If a Ring belt had to go to the winner of Peter-Maskaev to get Wlad or Chagaev or Sultan to fight that guy, I'd be for it. If it had to go to ANYONE, if it would get the 4 beltholders to fight, I'd be for it.

Frankly, I'm embarassed that they can't do what Antonio Tarver and Glen Johnson did, it's an embarassment to the sport. When Wlad had his mandatory, he should have simply gotten stripped and fought another champion anyways. The boxing fans and boxing media can see through being stripped for not fighting Ray Austin and fighting another champion.

Tarver knew that fighting the #1 challenger was more important than fighting his mandatory, and props to him for that. It's a shame the HW titleholders can hide behind "mandatory" fights.

DamonD

09-10-2007, 04:40 AM

Fuck no.

Let him win it in the ring...he's just one potential fight away from doing that anyway, so why the rush?

rushman

09-10-2007, 05:08 AM

Wlad has not earned the Ring belt, by the Ring's own rules.

I dont always agree with how the Ring belt works - it is far too easy for the current champ to hold the belt hostage. But no one is holding the HW belt hostage!

Wlad is the current best, Ring belt or no. Plenty of fighers have belts - only one is the best.

WiDDoW_MaKeR

09-10-2007, 04:26 PM

cross_trainer

09-10-2007, 04:31 PM

Deal with this....show me the rule that says you can RETIRE for years and come back and simply reclaim it?

Technically, yeah. The lineal title remains with the retired title holder. Hence the confusion over who the "real champion" was when Jeffries came out of retirement to meet Johnson.

cross_trainer

09-10-2007, 04:33 PM

The ring belt isn't anything more than what Wlad already has anyways. It is just a magazine. Wlad is the people's champion, and everyone from the fans, to all of the other fighters out there acknowledge that Wladimir is the real Champion in the heavyweight division. He doesn't have to wait for the #2 or #3 ranked guy in ring mag to agree to fight him for us to know that. Especially since he already beat the #2.

I don't give credence to "people's champion"...Ali tried this title when he lost to Frazier, but it didn't help him much. If Wlad wants to be champion, he should unify at least one of the other belts. For that matter, if he could even grab the two traditional ones (WBC, WBA) he would be lineal.

Irish Steel

09-10-2007, 05:37 PM

EpsilonAxis

09-10-2007, 08:41 PM

Well, rules need to be in place, so i dont think so.

But no one in their right mind questions that Klitschko is the #1 HW out there today right now. He has a resume far better than everyone else in the division that goes back 7+ years against good fighters.

kg0208

09-10-2007, 08:43 PM

Technically, yeah. The lineal title remains with the retired title holder. Hence the confusion over who the "real champion" was when Jeffries came out of retirement to meet Johnson.

I was referring to the Ring title. Not the Lineal title, which Vitali never held.

EpsilonAxis

09-10-2007, 08:44 PM

I don't give credence to "people's champion"...Ali tried this title when he lost to Frazier, but it didn't help him much. If Wlad wants to be champion, he should unify at least one of the other belts. For that matter, if he could even grab the two traditional ones (WBC, WBA) he would be lineal.

I normally see some validity in this, but definitely not in the current landscape. None of the other champs seem to be able to even hold their titles for any meaningful amount of time or defenses. Wlad on the other hand has been beating many of the best out there, and typically in dominant fashion.

So until either Chagaev, Maskaev or the Sultan/Holyfield winner shows something, Wlad has got to be considered at the very least #1, and possibly be considered THE champ if need be.

None of the other guys are even close at this point, although I do think Chagaev could pull the upset potentially.

PH|LLA

09-10-2007, 08:52 PM

psychopath

09-10-2007, 10:13 PM

Should Wladimir Klitschko Be Awarded The Ring Belt By Default?

Nah, definitely not. It will just raised questions and controversy. He has to earn it by fighting unification fights.

cross_trainer

09-10-2007, 10:43 PM

I normally see some validity in this, but definitely not in the current landscape. None of the other champs seem to be able to even hold their titles for any meaningful amount of time or defenses. Wlad on the other hand has been beating many of the best out there, and typically in dominant fashion.

So until either Chagaev, Maskaev or the Sultan/Holyfield winner shows something, Wlad has got to be considered at the very least #1, and possibly be considered THE champ if need be.

None of the other guys are even close at this point, although I do think Chagaev could pull the upset potentially.

He should definitely be considered #1. Just not "champion" yet. Lewis, Tyson, Holyfield, and Bowe were able to become undisputed champions in the last seventeen years, despite multiple belts and incompetent beltholders...Klitschko surely will have the same opportunity if he pushes for it.