WBC Franchise title, positive or negative for boxing ?

ValMar · Post by **ValMar** » 12 Nov 2019, 13:10

What do you think ?
IMHO, this is a bullshait, absolutely.

margaret thatcher · Post by **margaret thatcher** » 12 Nov 2019, 13:12

In both cases it's been used when the 'champion' has a very interesting mandatory opponent, that of course the franchise means they no longer have to face. In theory it could be good if they had some sh!tty ass mandatories and used the franchise label to have better fights. But Canelo-Charlo and Loma-Haney are both good fights

Enlightened-One · Post by **Enlightened-One** » 12 Nov 2019, 13:16

Without breaking the belts down per governing body (i.e. WBC, WBA, WBO, IBF, IBO, WBF, WBPF, IBC, WBU, IBA, IBU, GBC, UBO, WBU, WBL, PBC, WBS, PBF, IBFed etc.)...

What "world" title variations do we already have?

• Franchise
• Recess
• Emeritus
• Lineal
• RING
• Emerald
• Onyx
• Eternal
• Gold
• Silver
• Interim
• Regular
• Diamond
• Global
• Unified
• Undisputed
• Super

I’ve possibly excluded a few!

So how much harm can one extra redundant belt really cause?

If the money is there, fighters will face each other, regardless the title at stake.

drunkenpiper36 · Post by **drunkenpiper36** » 12 Nov 2019, 14:09

Yeah I think eliminating belts would be the real step forward. Not adding more

MATTPRENTICE · Post by **MATTPRENTICE** » 12 Nov 2019, 15:10

The title makes the man or the man makes the title?

drunkenpiper36 wrote: ↑12 Nov 2019, 14:09 Yeah I think eliminating belts would be the real step forward. Not adding more

We're at the point where Top Rank or PBC could start sanctioning their own titles and I wouldn't even care. The Ali Act is very much not enforced as it is.

drunkenpiper36 · Post by **drunkenpiper36** » 12 Nov 2019, 15:47

Yeah I just care about watching good fights. Not whatever belt they’re fighting for

DrDuke · Post by **DrDuke** » 12 Nov 2019, 16:11

Of course, it's utter sh!t, no question about that. Those multiple versions are corrupt nonsense.

Enlightened-One · Post by **Enlightened-One** » 12 Nov 2019, 16:35

MATTPRENTICE wrote: ↑12 Nov 2019, 15:10The Ali Act is very much not enforced as it is.

What do you mean by that?

margaret thatcher · Post by **margaret thatcher** » 12 Nov 2019, 16:35

Chomping at the bit to bring out some of those Al Haymon court rulings aren't you

Jeff_lacy_ko · Post by **Jeff_lacy_ko** » 12 Nov 2019, 17:41

Its great. The more titles and more absurd they become the less and less people will attach value to these orgs.

Titles for all!!!

Lackeos · Post by **Lackeos** » 13 Nov 2019, 00:48

It's additional bullsh*t.

Boxing Prospect · Post by **Boxing Prospect** » 13 Nov 2019, 04:38

They were used in situations that the WBC themselves created. They have rarely enforced a middleweight mandatory going back years and they let Loma vs Campbell be for their WBC title....and that's ignoring the fact Haney has actually done very very little...

Heretic · Post by **Heretic** » 13 Nov 2019, 10:00

Everything WBC is doing is negative for boxing

Enlightened-One · Post by **Enlightened-One** » 13 Nov 2019, 11:56

Heretic wrote: ↑13 Nov 2019, 10:00 Everything WBC is doing is negative for boxing

Yeah, I absolutely agree.

Even the WBC's Clean Boxing Program has turned sour! At one point, VADA's test results meant everything, but now the WBC have started overriding their ruling and abiding by WADA instead.

So now we have situations whereby the WBC bans certain fighters failed VADA tests, but others aren't. We also have situations whereby the WBC punish fighters even if they haven't been charged with any wrongdoing by VADA or any organisation affiliated to WADA.

It's got to the point that the WBC heavily fine fighters for failing drug tests, but they refuse to use these funds to pay for additional testing (they won't disclose where this money has gone), which means that very few boxers signed-up to the CBP are tested at all!

halfamill · Post by **halfamill** » 13 Nov 2019, 13:05

Jeff_lacy_ko wrote: ↑12 Nov 2019, 17:41 Its great. The more titles and more absurd they become the less and less people will attach value to these orgs.

Titles for all!!!

I agree. I just wish the WBO and IBF start doing the same to speed up the process.

Enlightened-One · Post by **Enlightened-One** » 14 Nov 2019, 09:48

"World Boxing Council President: WBC Franchise status will be proved right" (Source: WBN)

World Boxing Council President Mauricio Sulaiman has urged fans to be patient when it comes to the new ‘Franchise Champion’ status handed down of late.

Canelo Alvarez and Vasyl Lomachenko both hold the honor having won world titles at different weights. The pair have proved themselves two of the best boxers on the planet.

As WBN previously explained, the concept was conceived to elevate a certain belt holder above their champion accolade.

Effectively, the move means Canelo and Lomachenko are WBC belt holders forever. Like being accepted into the WBC Hall Of Fame, as such.

Every bout will see them representing the WBC. Giving their opponent the chance to become mandatory in the said division they fight.

Once earned, the WBC Franchise status cannot be revoked. It’s bestowed on a fighter for life.

This means the old strap then goes up for grabs to the next contender. In this case, Jermall Charlo and Devin Haney.

Giving titles to Charlo at middleweight and Haney at lightweight initially caused confusion, which may eventually be cleared up by the offering of a mandatory fight in future cases instead.

In time, Sulaiman assured those worried about another crown in boxing that the reason will become clearer.

“The WBC (also) created the mandatory and it is one of the greatest rules,” explained Suliaman. “Franchise is a concept that will prove right as time passes by,” he added.

ValMar · Post by **ValMar** » 16 Nov 2019, 07:39

PBC will create the PBC title/belt (likely, very likely). This is a pure farce.

ewenhay · Post by **ewenhay** » 16 Nov 2019, 07:53

I think boxing fans are unanimous that this is a bad thing?