Nate Campbell: Thoughts on "The Ring"
By Nate Campbell: My recent comments about the Ring magazine "title" have led some folks to think that I am trying to discredit Ring, and everything they have done for boxing over the past 80 years or so. Nothing could be further from the truth. As a kid, I grew up reading Ring magazine, and KO, and Boxing Illustrated, among many others. I have always been a fan of Ring magazine. My problem is not with them specifically, but with the effort going on these days to say that somehow the Ring title = the lineal title, and the true world title belts (IBF, WBO, WBA, WBC) don't matter anymore.
The Ring title should be looked at for exactly what it is. Recognition from the top magazine in the sport. Nothing more. Nothing less. Because that's what it is. Now Ring has a few guidelines in place to dictate who exactly can be their "champion", but those guidelines are so few that you cannot look at the Ring title as a true world title. It is simply an award, a trophy, that happens to look like a title belt. And there's nothing wrong with that. Nothing at all. But it is NOT a true world title. It is simply the opinions of the editorial board of the magazine..
The biggest arguement some folks make is that the Ring rankings are "better" than everyone elses. And maybe they are. But they are just rankings. They are no different than say the Billboard 100. But being #1 in the Billboard rankings doesn't necessarily win you a Grammy. In the big picture, they don't mean anything. They are not a path to the title, which is what rankings really should be. You could be ranked #1 by Ring for 15 years, and still never get a title shot, because the "champion" is not forced to defend his title against the top ranked contender. Ever. That one thing disqualifies Ring from ever being considered a true world title. How can you win a title, and never have to give your #1, or #2, or even #10 contender a shot? And since Ring does not require mandatory defenses, their rankings can include everyone, which is why their rankings appear to be better than the sanctioning bodies. Alot of people wonder why the sanctioning bodies do not rank the champions or #1 contenders of the other organizations. I didn't understand this either for a long time, but I do now. Look at middleweight for example. Kelly Pavlik is the WBC/WBO champ. Abraham is the IBF champ. Now why would the IBF waste their time, and the #1 spot, by ranking Pavlik? Does anyone really think that if the fight went to purse bid, that Pavlik would take short money with the challengers share of the bid? Cmon, get real. They don't need to waste the spot, because the fight could get made as a unification. So they try and keep the rankings open for the guys who want to fight the fights, work their way up to eliminators, and get their shot that way. That's the way I did it. Does anyone think for 1 second that if I wasn't a mandatory challenger to Juan Diaz, that I would have ever gotten that fight? If you really believe that I would have, then I have some south Florida land I'd like to sell you. Anyways, so when you look at the Ring rankings, yes, they look better because they include everyone. The sanctioning bodies have to basically ignore the top 6 or 7 guys in the division, which makes their top 10 rankings include some guys you've never heard of. Is it perfect? No. But it's still better than the alternative.
Another problem I see is that guys get amnesia about doing their mandatories. It's like once they win the title, then all the promises they made to the sanctioning body when they won the title go out the window. I remember how mad I was when I was the #1 mandatory, and Julio Diaz wouldn't fight me. Instead, he sat for 9 months and waited for a payday with Juan, even though there was plenty of time to fight me in between. I don't want to be that guy. I don't want to become what I despised. I am going to try and fullfill every mandatory I have, and keep my titles. And the Anthony Petersons, and Amir Khans of the world who maybe didn't fight Godzilla on the way up, but followed the rules and fought their eliminators can get their shot too. Same as I did. At some point, it just may not be possible. Like if I have 2 or 3 mandatories all due at the same time. I would really like to see the sanctioning bodies get together, and work out a system where maybe the mandatories can fight each other first, to give the champion the ability to keep the titles together. I think that's important for the fans. And as a champion, I would love to be able to keep all the titles I worked so hard to get. Now maybe alot of fans probably wouldn't like the idea, because sometimes the mandatories aren't the most attractive fight out there. And as a champion, I would probably have to accept short money for a defense that the networks weren't interested in. But in the long run, being able to keep the titles together is important enough to me to do that. The process is important. It's what gives credibility to the sport. That a fighter, regardless of connections or who their promoter is, can ultimately fight their way up in the rankings and get a shot. Maybe it takes longer if you don't have the right connections, but if you just win the fights, sooner or later you can get there. I'm living proof of that. I fought eliminators on ESPN for peanuts while working a side job in order to get to #1. But the important thing to remember is that eventually I got there. And Juan Diaz had to fight me. Fast forward to now, and my situation with Casamayor. The truth is, that he doesn't have to fight me. If he doesn't, the WBO will strip him of the Interim title, but he will keep the Ring title. The same Ring title that he was not stripped of for refusing the Santa Cruz rematch. This is my issue with comparing the Ring title to a true world title. It's not the same, and it never will be. That doesn't mean it doesn't have a place. But it should be looked at for exactly what is is. It's an award. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Now some people might question why I stand up for the sanctioning bodies, when maybe they would strip me without a second thought if it suited their needs. Well, maybe that's true. Maybe it isn't. Or maybe, just maybe if champions would show as much respect for the sanctioning body AFTER they win the title as they did BEFORE they won it, than maybe things would get better. It has to start somewhere. Maybe I'm nuts. Maybe one man can't make a difference. But the sanctioning bodies ARE important. Are there problems with them? Absolutely. Is there preferential treatment to some fighters over others? You bet. But is the answer to just devalue them completely and let our "champions" be picked by a magazine staff that happens to be owned by a promoter? Not in a million years.
I truly love this sport. It has brought me to heights I could never even have imagined. And I may only be one man, but fortuantely because of where I am now in this sport, my words are being heard. I only hope that people are listening
