The oldest Commonwealth title lineages have been ended

Post Reply
Horse
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 22335
Joined: 03 Jul 2005, 17:09

The oldest Commonwealth title lineages have been ended

Post by Horse »

Before O'Donnell and Small gave up, or were stripped of, their Commonwealth titles, the lineages of those two titles went back to 2004. There are few boxing titles of any type that's lineages go back that far, and I think it is a shame that those lineages were reset so cheaply.

Start of current Commonwealth title lineages:

Code: Select all

Light Middleweight		10.04.2004***
Welterweight			17.09.2004***

Heavyweight				10.12.2005

Light Welterweight		15.06.2007
Middleweight			14.11.2007

Featherweight			09.05.2008
Super Featherweight		26.09.2008
Super Flyweight			31.10.2008

Flyweight				23.01.2009
Cruiserweight			06.02.2009
Lightweight				19.06.2009
Super Middleweight		18.12.2009

Bantamweight				22.01.2010
Super Bantamweight		05.02.2010
Light Heavyweight		12.03.2010
The reason I mention it is that I believe that belts being vacated is one of the reasons why the Commonwealth title is losing credibility. Too many vacant titles being fought for instead of the reigning champions defending their belts.
Jeff Thomas
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3016
Joined: 30 Apr 2009, 06:32

Re: The oldest Commonwealth title lineages have been ended

Post by Jeff Thomas »

The commonwealth title seems to be the replacement for intercontinental titles these days real shame
whicker
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4550
Joined: 01 Jan 2008, 01:52

Re: The oldest Commonwealth title lineages have been ended

Post by whicker »

Yeah, it's all being cheapened a lot.

shame.

Not sure exactly why belts need to be given up all the time, too.
boxingchat
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1934
Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 05:26

Re: The oldest Commonwealth title lineages have been ended

Post by boxingchat »

It's been cheapened by the likes of the Hattons and Hayemaker paying fighters to give the title up to allow unworthy fighters to compete for it. Small in favour of McDonagh for example and I hear O'Donnells just kopped a few quid too!

Until the Commonwealth body stop this type of thing happening then alas the title will become less prestigious.
whicker
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4550
Joined: 01 Jan 2008, 01:52

Re: The oldest Commonwealth title lineages have been ended

Post by whicker »

boxingchat wrote:It's been cheapened by the likes of the Hattons and Hayemaker paying fighters to give the title up to allow unworthy fighters to compete for it. Small in favour of McDonagh for example and I hear O'Donnells just kopped a few quid too!

Until the Commonwealth body stop this type of thing happening then alas the title will become less prestigious.
I'm not sure why Small is less "worthy" than McDonagh.

Small was due to fight for the British title in March 2009, McDonagh lost an eliminator for the British title in May 2009.


But I DO agree about unworthy fighters, it's just that Anthony Small isn't a good example. There were much better examples- basically, ANY of the "unknown Africans" (with perhaps one or two exceptions.)

And yeah, I do agree that it's a poor reflection on the sport if "Champions" are being paid to give up titles. For sure, it's the "business of boxing" and all that, but still....
Twinkle Toes
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3342
Joined: 22 Sep 2003, 08:38

Re: The oldest Commonwealth title lineages have been ended

Post by Twinkle Toes »

boxingchat wrote:It's been cheapened by the likes of the Hattons and Hayemaker paying fighters to give the title up to allow unworthy fighters to compete for it. Small in favour of McDonagh for example and I hear O'Donnells just kopped a few quid too!

Until the Commonwealth body stop this type of thing happening then alas the title will become less prestigious.
Fights like Bellew/Moore don't help either :shame:

I don't recall who promoted that one, but who ever it was they should raise their hand when we start talking about the comonwealth belt being cheapened.
Horse
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 22335
Joined: 03 Jul 2005, 17:09

Re: The oldest Commonwealth title lineages have been ended

Post by Horse »

whicker wrote:I'm not sure why Small is less "worthy" than McDonagh.
Small gave up the Commonwealth title so that McDonagh could fight for it. I think that was what boxingchat was referring to and I think he meant that McDonagh was less worthy than Small.
whicker
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4550
Joined: 01 Jan 2008, 01:52

Re: The oldest Commonwealth title lineages have been ended

Post by whicker »

Horse wrote:
whicker wrote:I'm not sure why Small is less "worthy" than McDonagh.
Small gave up the Commonwealth title so that McDonagh could fight for it. I think that was what boxingchat was referring to and I think he meant that McDonagh was less worthy than Small.
Ah- you might be right there.

My error.

In which case, I tend to agree.

I don't think McDonagh is a valid challenger for the Commonwealth Belt at this stage, given his last two loses (which were also his last two fights.)

To be honest, other fighters probably have more of a "shout" than Woolcombe, too, but lets be honest, the Commonwealth title is more or less a domestic belt now, with occassional foreign "opponent" level fighters brought in.

Some potential decent challengers:

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer
Post Reply