My Ranking Rules

[diehard]

OK, enough of all this craziness about guys like Parker and AJ being ranked in the top 5 without having faced anyone in the top 10.  And Martin and Glazkov ranked in the top 5, and even maybe fighting for a title in a face-off without ever facing decent opposition.  And Tyson Fury fighting for a title against Klit when he's only had 4 fights in 3 years. 

So here's my criteria for a top 15 in any of the alphabets:

1) To be in the top 15, you have to have beaten someone in the top 15.  To be in the top 10, you have to have beaten someone in the top 10.  To be in the top 5, you have to have beaten someone in the top 5.  That goes for each alphabet in which a fighter is rated.

2)  If you are ranked in the top 15, you have to fight someone in the top 15 every six months.  If you win, you keep your ranking.  If you lose, you switch places with whoever beats you.  If you don't fight someone in the top 15 every six months, you are no longer ranked in that particular alphabet.

3) If someone forfeits their right to a ranking by not fighting someone in the top 15 in six months, the alphabet committee selects the next best fighter.  He then has to fight someone in the top 15 in his next fight.

This will eliminate, as much as possible, the politics of the alphabets, and result in much better match-ups for the pundits.

[shamrock]

That might straighten out a lot of rubbish ah mate..
NZ rankings can have a guy with one win ahead of a guy with a good few fights but a loss in his final slot.

[diehard]

Cranky, rule 3 applies. The next in line gets drafted into the top 15, then HE has to fight someone in the top 15 in his next fight. Rankings are so important for fighters.

[cranky]

hey Die- I noticed that and then deleted my post.. sorry that you were already replying...

[cranky]

the main thing is forcing the top guys to face each other... seems that does need forcing....

[diehard]

Cranky, that's one of the benefits. Everyone wins. Fans get to see good fights. Fighters get a chance to move up in the rankings. Promoters stay busy.

It would operate similar to a mandatory. But instead of it just being the champ, it's everyone in the top 15. Truth be told, this happened with regularity in the old days before the alphabets took over. It would make for an exciting alphabet if one of them decided to do it. Currently, some fighters in the top 15 go years without fighting anyone in the top 15.

[mippy]

Can top end heavies really handle a fight every six months? I can see that sort of system shortening careers as there's only so much punishment you can take

[diehard]

Klit fought about once every six months. Old timers used to fight about every two months. It would be a promoters dream, with fighters saying "you have to get x, y, or z to fight me to keep my ranking. Right now, we have the opposite. Top 5 fighters fight every 6 months against nobody's. Charles Martin's last fight was against Izu's opponent. And we know what Izu did to him.

[diehard]

Glazkov has fought one guy, Steve Cunningham, who's ranked in one alphabet in the top 10. That was a while ago. Martin has fought NOBODY in the top 15. Both Glazkov and Martin are in the top 5 in several alphabets. Politics.