In-active fighters should lose ranking position

This is realy a tricky thing. In-active fighters should not be rewarded by keeping their ranking postion.

I think after six months of in-activity, unless got a legit medical or personal reason why not in the ring, they should lose five spots in the ranking. And drop off after six months in-activy.

I know why The Ring and other rankings don't do this.

If they dropped Mayweather five positions for in-activity, for example, you know critics would attack the rankings, "Oh look, their rankings are a joke, they got Mayweather ranked below so and so," or "he's not even ranked, what a joke!"

i would agree. it would probably make the fighters actually fight for their spot.

GrantZilla wrote:This is realy a tricky thing. In-active fighters should not be rewarded by keeping their ranking postion.

I think after six months of in-activity, unless got a legit medical or personal reason why not in the ring, they should lose five spots in the ranking. And drop off after six months in-activy.

I know why The Ring and other rankings don't do this.

If they dropped Mayweather five positions for in-activity, for example, you know critics would attack the rankings, "Oh look, their rankings are a joke, they got Mayweather ranked below so and so," or "he's not even ranked, what a joke!"

Alot of boxing fans (and some writers) are morons. If a guy is sitting there he shouldn't be ranked. fighting at least every 6 months is not too much to ask. You have made a good point.

I think Asterisk should be used.

Like *Floyd Mayweather

*(in-active)

many years ago ring magazine did just that..i read several times that for example a fighter droped from number 3 to 5 and the reason was inactivity..inactivity at that time was viewed as not fighting for 3 months or so..5 spots at once may be to harsh but yes droping in ratings for inactivity is valid..the problem is activity today is defined as 2 fights a year..floyd is a perfect example..noo fights in 8 months and none in the near future..drop him a good 3 spots with the inactivity reason stated in that issue..it goes to nine months drop him 2 more spots..hits one year your out of the top ten..rankings should be earned based on recent performances not past performances of the last few years etc etc..
if a fighter or promoter dont like it then say well fight then..staying number 2 isnt eternal.

Yeah. It's sickening kind of in-activty common with fighters today.

MAyweather ranked 2nd at Welter by The Ring, and #1 at welter by Fat Dan. However, Fat Dan says he will not keep his # 1 spot for much longer do to in-activy. I'd imagine he'll just drop him to 2nd and move Manny up to # 1.

He shouldn't even be ranked in top five with in-activy and no fight in the future. The fool pretty much semi-retired.

Unless there is a PROVEN injury, then yes they should be dropped and forced to start over