Hi All,
*) if you wish to say "WBC Super-Duper intergalactic" title (etc) - please leave this topic.
*) if you wish to say all belts are worthless - please leave this topic.
For anyone who genuinely fancies playing: what the heck are all those belts for?
Bottom left is his original WBC Super-Featherweight title he won beating Genaro Hernandez (before they changed the design).
Above the old WBC belt should be his titles at Light, Light-Welter, Welter, Welter again, and Light-Middle.
On the right are his WBA Super-titles at Welter and Light-Middle, as well as (I pressume) his normal WBA belts in both divisions? Above that are the WBO Welter and IBF Welter he won against Pacquaio and Judah respectively.
I am involved +45 years and I KNOW my call is the right call to make.
March/2007 I founded: United WBC WBA IBF WBO /"everything else" [UWBCAFO-I]. I have a verified amateur/pro Ring- record myself of 25(0/11)-27(3/3)-1 won-losses-Drawn (Ko's/Rsc & on losses Rsc/ret pro numbers 1 st) [my seventh pro, I fought a boxer name Fred Suero]. I am 147 and the first eight professional I went in against line of 168* 160 160 168 154 160 175 160 *BoxRec entry is not what it is. I was in Ne gg/or USA/ABF 4x 83-86 at Lowell (Waltham for the "odd")] What I am primarily interested in is "reeling in" status at echelon basis. These "super" or "regular" titles the WBA does (not to mention, "interm") YES IT IS "ODD AND STRANGE" but......I view it as idiocentricity. ISN'T THE "TRUE CANCER" ATTACKING/"Eating" at the SPORT! I recognize the WBC WBA IBF & WBO & draw the line after the first & major four. Everything after those four I give them "second echelon" ability. Some of the '2e' abilities are NBA, IBC, IBO ("worse struggler" GREEDY bastard fish!), WBU, WBF, WAA. And this ISN'T END OF LIST.
What hurts boxing bad is when the first major four let boxers such as Wayne Hill ("Wladimir Klitschko") and Gennady Golovkin "keep" a Ibo I am involved +45 years and I KNOW my call is the right call to make.
March/2007 I founded: United WBC WBA IBF WBO /"everything else" [UWBCAFO-I]. I have a verified Ring- record myself of 25(0/11)-27(3/3)-1 won-losses-Drawn (Ko's/Rsc & on losses Rsc/ret pro numbers 1 st) [my seventh pro, I fought a boxer name Fred Suero. I am 147 and the first eight professional I went in against line of 168* 160 160 168 154 160 175 160 *BoxRec entry is not what it is. I was in Ne gg/or USA/ABF 4x 83-86 at Lowell (Waltham for the "odd")] What I am primarily interested in is "reeling in" status at echelon basis. These "super" or "regular" titles the WBA does (not to mention, "interm") YES IT IS "ODD AND STRANGE" but......I view it as idiocentricity. ISN'T THE "TRUE CANCER" ATTACKING/"Eating" at the SPORT! I recognize the WBC WBA IBF & WBO & draw the line after the first & major four. Everything after those four I give them "second echelon" ability. Some of the '2e' abilities are NBA, IBC, IBO ("worse struggler" GREEDY bastard fish!), WBU, WBF, WAA. And this ISN'T END OF LIST.
What hurts boxing bad is when the first major four let boxers such as Wayne Hill ("Wladimir Klitschko") and Gennady Golovkin "keep" a Ibo "belt" beside.
How does such hurt the Sport? That is a international/"Social"/World scope determination. Something that has "grown on the Sport" and crippled in eyes of critical print type media world wide. If we "narrow" this by a echelon understanding such will remold world perspective. &, '2e' has a approximate five USA States value. 1 st "rule" echelons don't mix"belt" beside.
How does such hurt the Sport? That is a international/"Social"/World scope determination. Something that has "grown on the Sport" and crippled in eyes of critical print type media world wide. If we "narrow" this by a echelon understanding such will remold world perspective. &, '2e' has a approximate five USA States value. 1 st "rule" echelons don't mix. We also have dq the 'C' weight. "200LB" hurts the H wt. div. distinction. We wish to RESET the weight div back to 195/190 "champions choice"/VACS always 190. (Of course, the ***years div set at higher wt. must aristis the history)
We effect only male side of the Sport. We DO NOT YET TOUCH WOMEN'S BOXING. We urge "true unity" there as well.
UWBCAFO-I is "mechanical" in it's opperation. "Code" that we in no way effect or regulate "fashions or styles" (if I own a GYM, I "will"!).
It is the '2e' we REGISTER & "effect". If a group is outside the 1St & major four and are NOT registered by the UWBCAFO-I as a "second echelon" then, YOU ARE FRAUD!
We give A-O.K. on "mixing" between the echelons all "intercontinental" belts or equilavent. We effect world title only!
'1e' only continue what they are doing. Even the 'C' div BS. This is "cooperation", folks!
But.. it is "poor leadership" that the '1e' has "allow" other groups to "mix in".
Further on my own portf. have....boxed against four (4) boxers who win or draw V coming (twice)/ EX (twice) world '1e' champion. By name: Mathew Hilton; Michael Moorer; Saoul Mamby; "Boom Boom"Mancini. &..have faced three (3) boxers they gain LIVE WORLD TITLE SHOT [V. GRosi/V. HMaske/V. RJones].
I Founded Central CT. State Univ. Boxing Program 1980 - 92 ("many awards")
Sorry about the "over lap"// I wrote this "exclusive" here//this BoxRec topic but I WILL copy my *work & when I went to COPY this it must of "super imposed" at that time. "Sorry for the 'stupid' look....("IBO styles" Ha ha!)" HERE IS THE STRAIGHT LINE [Repeat]
Re: Fancy playing the "Name the belts" game?
Post(12/29/15)
I am involved +45 years and I KNOW my call is the right call to make.
March/2007 I founded: United WBC WBA IBF WBO /"everything else" [UWBCAFO-I]. I have a verified amateur/pro Ring- record myself of 25(0/11)-27(3/3)-1 won-losses-Drawn (Ko's/Rsc & on losses Rsc/ret pro numbers 1 st) [my seventh pro, I fought a boxer name Fred Suero. I am 147 and the first eight professional I went in against line of 168* 160 160 168 154 160 175 160 *BoxRec entry is not what it is. I was in Ne gg/or USA/ABF 4x 83-86 at Lowell (Waltham for the "odd")] What I am primarily interested in is "reeling in" status at echelon basis. These "super" or "regular" titles the WBA does (not to mention, "interm") YES IT IS "ODD AND STRANGE" but......I view it as idiocentricity. ISN'T THE "TRUE CANCER" ATTACKING/"Eating" at the SPORT! I recognize the WBC WBA IBF & WBO & draw the line after the first & major four. Everything after those four I give them "second echelon" ability. Some of the '2e' abilities are NBA, IBC, IBO ("worse struggler" GREEDY bastard fish!), WBU, WBF, WAA. And this ISN'T END OF LIST.
What hurts boxing bad is when the first major four let boxers such as Wayne Hill ("Wladimir Klitschko") and Gennady Golovkin "keep" a Ibo "belt" beside.
How does such hurt the Sport? That is a international/"Social"/World scope determination. Something that has "grown on the Sport" and crippled in eyes of critical print type media world wide. If we "narrow" this by a echelon understanding such will remold world perspective. &, '2e' has a approximate five USA States value. 1 st "rule" echelons don't mix"belt" beside.
How does such hurt the Sport? That is a international/"Social"/World scope determination. Something that has "grown on the Sport" and crippled in eyes of critical print type media world wide. If we "narrow" this by a echelon understanding such will remold world perspective. &, '2e' has a approximate five USA States value. 1 st "rule" echelons don't mix. We also have dq the 'C' weight. "200LB" hurts the H wt. div. distinction. We wish to RESET the weight div back to 195/190 "champions choice"/VACS always 190. (Of course, the ***years div set at higher wt. must aristis the history)
We effect only male side of the Sport. We DO NOT YET TOUCH WOMEN'S BOXING. We urge "true unity" there as well.
UWBCAFO-I is "mechanical" in it's opperation. "Code" that we in no way effect or regulate "fashions or styles" (if I own a GYM, I "will"!).
It is the '2e' we REGISTER & "effect". If a group is outside the 1St & major four and are NOT registered by the UWBCAFO-I as a "second echelon" then, YOU ARE FRAUD!
We give A-O.K. on "mixing" between the echelons all "intercontinental" belts or equilavent. We effect world title only!
'1e' only continue what they are doing. Even the 'C' div BS. This is "cooperation", folks!
But.. it is "poor leadership" that the '1e' has "allow" other groups to "mix in".
Further on my own portf. have....boxed against four (4) boxers who win or draw V coming (twice)/ EX (twice) world '1e' champion. By name: Mathew Hilton; Michael Moorer; Saoul Mamby; "Boom Boom"Mancini. &..have faced three (3) boxers they gain LIVE WORLD TITLE SHOT [V. GRosi/V. HMaske/V. RJones].
I Founded Central CT. State Univ. Boxing Program 1980 - 92 ("many awards")
The WBC WBA IBF WBO must be viewed as the respective FIRST &MAJOR FOUR. "Echeloning" is the exact way we must proceed with the GROWNING LIST OF GOVERNING ORGANIZATIONS.
