British titles over 10 rounds - the future?

el_grande_mauro_mina · Post by **el_grande_mauro_mina** » 12 Mar 2008, 08:38

Nearly every national title and you can look up all the major national titles
(Italian, German, Australian, South African, Argentinian, Spanish, French and Canadian) are all being fought over 10 rounds.

If I'm right - it is only us, the Mexicans and the NABF/USBA who still have title fights over 12 rounds.

Now we were the last boxing commision by a long chalk to shorten the championship distance from 15 rounds to 12 rounds.

So, you don't have to be mystic meg to see that the British title being fought over 10 rounds will be a reality sooner or later.

What are the pros and cons? (In your opinion)

Personally, I think it is a good idea.

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 12 Mar 2008, 09:32

I think it makes the distinction clear between 'WORLD' titles and 'regional' or 'national' belts, but at the same time its a big fight, for some people the biggest they will ever appear in....

would ticket prices drop due to two less rounds in the main event? lol

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 12 Mar 2008, 09:38

No, No, No... I'd be completely against the idea for a number of reasons.

1) Not many of the other nations treat their national title as seriously as other... you don't get many French champion in the world top 30 - whereas most, if not all of the Brits are in the top 30.

2) So as a consequence, this could mean a suprise world title fight (e.g. Wayne Elcock) - not the greatest preperation if you haven't even fought in a scheduled 12 rounder. There would also be a significant step up to EBU level.

3) What does that mean for cards with no titles on the line. Would Jamie Moore vs Lujan HAVE to have been an 8 rounder? Alot of decent exports will not fight in an 8 rounder - on the basis that there is more of a chance it going the distance and them being shafted.

4) Would it mean the creation of more spurious world titles so that the promoter can advertise a 12 round contest?

I personally disagree with you Carlos in that I don't think it will happen for a long time, if ever. Mainly cause we treat the domestic title differently to other nations.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 12 Mar 2008, 09:39

MatthewS wrote:I think it makes the distinction clear between 'WORLD' titles and 'regional' or 'national' belts, but at the same time its a big fight, for some people the biggest they will ever appear in....

would ticket prices drop due to two less rounds in the main event? lol

You think there'll be a 8% discount

I prefer 12rounders, the fighters are fit enough to fight them, maybe just not quite as skilled as top level guys.

Poncey · Post by **Poncey** » 12 Mar 2008, 09:49

It would make a logical step up, hopefully increase the pace of the rounds, and make the fights closer. A boxer has less time to create a lead.

If a World Championship, which is the highest level, is 12 rounds why is a national championship the same standard?!

I do think European should stay at 12, though.

whicker · Post by **whicker** » 12 Mar 2008, 10:49

Also commonwealth?

I think 12 rounds is fine. Shortening them to 10 just takes away some of the prestige of a British title fight.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 12 Mar 2008, 11:19

Difference is though - ask any British fighter what would they rather win - the British or the EU title, or these WBO Intercontinel straps. They would chose the British.

Ask a French fighter - what would that rather win - the French or the EU and they would say EU.

Ask a South American what would they rather win - their national belt or one of these WBC Contintel Americas baubble's -and they would say the latter.

It speaks volumes that at a recent Eurosport show -there was 2 French title UNDERCARD fights to an EU title fight. Also, that Jean Marie Codet was fighting for one of these titles... honest enough pro, but Martin Power handled him easy years before he was in contention for the British equivalent. It would be like one of the Smith boys fighting for the British title.

Okay, I know the EU title is also a 10 round affair - but the non British EU nations consider it much more important than their National title... we consider it alot less important.

Horse · Post by **Horse** » 12 Mar 2008, 12:21

Why wold the BBBofC want to devalue their own title?

I can only see them doing this if they are forced to do so and I can't see that happening any time soon.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 12 Mar 2008, 12:28

stujones wrote:Difference is though - ask any British fighter what would they rather win - the British or the EU title, or these WBO Intercontinel straps. They would chose the British.

Ask a French fighter - what would that rather win - the French or the EU and they would say EU.

Ask a South American what would they rather win - their national belt or one of these WBC Contintel Americas baubble's -and they would say the latter.

It speaks volumes that at a recent Eurosport show -there was 2 French title UNDERCARD fights to an EU title fight. Also, that Jean Marie Codet was fighting for one of these titles... honest enough pro, but Martin Power handled him easy years before he was in contention for the British equivalent. It would be like one of the Smith boys fighting for the British title.

Okay, I know the EU title is also a 10 round affair - but the non British EU nations consider it much more important than their National title... we consider it alot less important.

As a fan I definately value a British Champion over the said titles. Theres a proud history with the British title and I wouldnt like to see it devalued

el_grande_mauro_mina · Post by **el_grande_mauro_mina** » 12 Mar 2008, 13:11

stujones wrote:No, No, No... I'd be completely against the idea for a number of reasons.

1) Not many of the other nations treat their national title as seriously as other... you don't get many French champion in the world top 30 - whereas most, if not all of the Brits are in the top 30.

2) So as a consequence, this could mean a suprise world title fight (e.g. Wayne Elcock) - not the greatest preperation if you haven't even fought in a scheduled 12 rounder. There would also be a significant step up to EBU level.

3) What does that mean for cards with no titles on the line. Would Jamie Moore vs Lujan HAVE to have been an 8 rounder? Alot of decent exports will not fight in an 8 rounder - on the basis that there is more of a chance it going the distance and them being shafted.

4) Would it mean the creation of more spurious world titles so that the promoter can advertise a 12 round contest?

I personally disagree with you Carlos in that I don't think it will happen for a long time, if ever. Mainly cause we treat the domestic title differently to other nations.

The British title has a lot of gravitas but the distance has been shortened once before so I can see it as a marking time exercise that the distance will be shortened again Stu. I agree with Emerson in the fact that because the distance is shortened it doesn't necessarily mean the quality of the action is going to be comprimised - I love watching K1 and their fights are really entertaining over 3, 5 minute rounds - loads of action in those fights because the timespan is shorter - I think 12 rounds is a long time for two men to fight in my opinion and I think 10 rounds is a good length for a title fight - we have had world title fights over 10 rounds in the past!

Also the days of getting decent imports to fight here has long gone, I don't remember the last time we got a decent import for a none title fight
I remember Charlie Magri fighting Santos Laciar over 10 rounds in a non title fight and Laciar went on to win the WBA title 6 months later. Those days are long gone.

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 12 Mar 2008, 13:16

MatthewS wrote:I think it makes the distinction clear between 'WORLD' titles and 'regional' or 'national' belts, but at the same time its a big fight, for some people the biggest they will ever appear in....

would ticket prices drop due to two less rounds in the main event? lol

just to make it clear i do come down on the side of - its the BRITISH title, lots of History behind it, so if we want it to be special, then fcuk the others....

we should have more 12 rounders, and more 'international' fights... at the moment its a bit like saying that only the FA Cup Final will be 90 minutes, all the others would be 75, or 60, or 45....

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 12 Mar 2008, 15:29

Well, Lujan dissapointed but on paper he was an ambitious fringe world class fighter - still around his peak.

scurlaruntings · Post by **scurlaruntings** » 15 Mar 2008, 07:02

The British title doesnt have any value anymore other than a historical value. The days when the champion of Britain, the Commenwealth, and Europe was a bonafide world championship contender are gone. The BBofC have sanctioned way to much bullshit over the years with the Lonsdale and Commenwealth belts that they`ve become immensely devalued on a global scene.All that really matters is the EBU which gives you recognition with the WBC.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 15 Mar 2008, 07:12

Brtish title has to be 12 rds. When you have a good division, you have good British title fights.

TerribleTerry · Post by **TerribleTerry** » 15 Mar 2008, 07:44

Shortening the distance of championship fights is a dreadful idea.

Is there something in the air over there in Korea Carlos??..

The championship rounds can be what makes or breaks a fighter - those last 6 minutes can be decisive and I would hate to see them dropped.

The subject of K1 is completely different - they fight in a tournament style in the main and the need to kick consistently means they are better suited to a 5 round distance - the same is true of full Muay Thai

This idea is a non starter. No way would the board consider devaluing the British title in such a manner IMO

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 15 Mar 2008, 09:31

English titles are for 10 rds and these are ok as they give young fighters something to fight for, ala Meager-Hunt in their classic fight. British titles have to be 12. They used to be 15 FFS, and there were some great fights in the past. OK, intercontinental and international fights and WBU crowns have watered things down but we can still have good nights in which British titles are contested. What was that thrilling fight last week...erm, Mitchell-Johanesson.

Boxingnut · Post by **Boxingnut** » 15 Mar 2008, 10:16

The last thing needed in my opinion is for British titles to be diluted any more. Leave British titles at 12 and increase World titles to 15 so there is a difference between regional and world level. Never gonna happen of course.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 15 Mar 2008, 10:24

I don't think it is such a good idea Carlos. Firstly the British title holds more prestige and of a higher value than the other titles mentioned which probably equate to our English title, which in itself is a good stepping stone for a young boxer on the way up and a welcome belt IMO.

Shortening the length would not aid boxer's experience, particularly younger fighters. At the moment getting 12 hard, rounds helps with the pacing and timing and when/if they step up to European and world level they have that experience.

If a fighter has been fighting all ten rounders then what happens when they are in a tough fight, faced mentally and physically with an extra 6 minutes than they are used? Alternatives would be promoters either using fake titles or non-title 12 rounders for domestic clashes which would render the British title worthless.