Without the sports’ governing bodies, boxing would just be like professional wrestling entertainment. There’d be no reason for rival promoters and TV networks to work with each other. Think about wrestlers that are employed by the WWE’s rivals or alternatively UFC fighters.Fightnight Scores wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 10:27 Are these numerous ABC governing bodies the single biggest issue for the sport?
Without all these belts and differing rankings, there wouldn't be so much picking and choosing of opponents by cautious Promoters, and all the knock on effect that it brings (TV deals etc).
WBO Introduces new belt
-
Enlightened-One
- Super Lightweight
- Posts: 14618
- Joined: 19 Jul 2016, 05:12
Re: WBO Introduces new belt
Re: WBO Introduces new belt
I disagree. The issue here is too many governing bodies with too many belts.Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 11:02Without the sports’ governing bodies, boxing would just be like professional wrestling entertainment. There’d be no reason for rival promoters and TV networks to work with each other. Think about wrestlers that are employed by the WWE’s rivals or alternatively UFC fighters.Fightnight Scores wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 10:27 Are these numerous ABC governing bodies the single biggest issue for the sport?
Without all these belts and differing rankings, there wouldn't be so much picking and choosing of opponents by cautious Promoters, and all the knock on effect that it brings (TV deals etc).
If there was one reputable (yes I know!) global governing body then promoters would be forced to work with each other or their fighters would be unable to progress.
-
Enlightened-One
- Super Lightweight
- Posts: 14618
- Joined: 19 Jul 2016, 05:12
Re: WBO Introduces new belt
Fair enough, I can see your point and I guess I agree with it. However, without any reputable governing body (and let’s face it, one doesn’t currently exist), there’d be total anarchy. Cross-promotional or cross-TV network fights wouldn’t happen.ewenhay wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 11:27I disagree. The issue here is too many governing bodies with too many belts.Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 11:02Without the sports’ governing bodies, boxing would just be like professional wrestling entertainment. There’d be no reason for rival promoters and TV networks to work with each other. Think about wrestlers that are employed by the WWE’s rivals or alternatively UFC fighters.Fightnight Scores wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 10:27 Are these numerous ABC governing bodies the single biggest issue for the sport?
Without all these belts and differing rankings, there wouldn't be so much picking and choosing of opponents by cautious Promoters, and all the knock on effect that it brings (TV deals etc).
If there was one reputable (yes I know!) global governing body then promoters would be forced to work with each other or their fighters would be unable to progress.
Re: WBO Introduces new belt
I agree, there needs to be a structure.Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 11:40Fair enough, I can see your point and I guess I agree with it. However, without any reputable governing body (and let’s face it, one doesn’t currently exist), there’d be total anarchy. Cross-promotional or cross-TV network fights wouldn’t happen.ewenhay wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 11:27I disagree. The issue here is too many governing bodies with too many belts.Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 11:02Without the sports’ governing bodies, boxing would just be like professional wrestling entertainment. There’d be no reason for rival promoters and TV networks to work with each other. Think about wrestlers that are employed by the WWE’s rivals or alternatively UFC fighters.Fightnight Scores wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 10:27 Are these numerous ABC governing bodies the single biggest issue for the sport?
Without all these belts and differing rankings, there wouldn't be so much picking and choosing of opponents by cautious Promoters, and all the knock on effect that it brings (TV deals etc).
If there was one reputable (yes I know!) global governing body then promoters would be forced to work with each other or their fighters would be unable to progress.
Unfortunately more than one body just leads to a different kind of anarchy
-
leejonesjnr
- Middleweight
- Posts: 2667
- Joined: 31 Dec 2013, 18:32
-
leejonesjnr
- Middleweight
- Posts: 2667
- Joined: 31 Dec 2013, 18:32
Re: WBO Introduces new belt
NopeRuthless-RKO wrote: ↑17 Dec 2018, 15:07I’m sure I read the WBO Global champion was Usyk.
It’s not one you defend. Kinda like the WBO Super. Get’s given to you after a certain amount of time or whatever other excuse they can give.
-
Fightnight Scores
- Super Featherweight
- Posts: 1767
- Joined: 09 Feb 2019, 04:59
Re: WBO Introduces new belt
I had SOME hopes years back that MAYBE the Ring Magazine could have been that overseeing body of respect by all parties. Fight fans, the boxers themselves and the promoters.ewenhay wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 11:49I agree, there needs to be a structure.Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 11:40Fair enough, I can see your point and I guess I agree with it. However, without any reputable governing body (and let’s face it, one doesn’t currently exist), there’d be total anarchy. Cross-promotional or cross-TV network fights wouldn’t happen.ewenhay wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 11:27I disagree. The issue here is too many governing bodies with too many belts.Enlightened-One wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 11:02Without the sports’ governing bodies, boxing would just be like professional wrestling entertainment. There’d be no reason for rival promoters and TV networks to work with each other. Think about wrestlers that are employed by the WWE’s rivals or alternatively UFC fighters.Fightnight Scores wrote: ↑05 Mar 2019, 10:27 Are these numerous ABC governing bodies the single biggest issue for the sport?
Without all these belts and differing rankings, there wouldn't be so much picking and choosing of opponents by cautious Promoters, and all the knock on effect that it brings (TV deals etc).
If there was one reputable (yes I know!) global governing body then promoters would be forced to work with each other or their fighters would be unable to progress.
Unfortunately more than one body just leads to a different kind of anarchy
But all that went out of the window when De La Hoya bought it
-
Enlightened-One
- Super Lightweight
- Posts: 14618
- Joined: 19 Jul 2016, 05:12
Re: WBO Introduces new belt
The WBO have very likely renamed the “Trans-Oceanic” title to remove the word “Trans” from being affiliated with their organisation, which prevent causing offence to activists and subsequently receiving excessively harsh criticism from the overly-sensitive members of the SJW and LGBTQ+ (aka LGBTQIA+ or LGBTTQQIAAP) communities. 
Re: WBO Introduces new belt
The biggest surprise is that they haven't introduced belts for each of the communitiesEnlightened-One wrote: ↑06 Mar 2019, 07:22 The WBO have very likely renamed the “Trans-Oceanic” title to remove the word “Trans” from being affiliated with their organisation, which prevent causing offence to activists and subsequently receiving excessively harsh criticism from the overly-sensitive members of the SJW and LGBTQ+ (aka LGBTQIA+ or LGBTTQQIAAP) communities.![]()
My money is on the wba thinking of it first