What happened to "non title fights"?

[bjornborgbook]

The most famous for me was Duran vs Dejesus 1 at MSG. But why were there non title fights? Don't world title fights sell better? Or were they really glorified sparring sessions to give a champ a lucrative warm up - or to build up a rivaly and rematch without the champ losing negotiating leverage?

Why were "non title fights" abandoned?

[margaret thatcher]

today people usually moan and call a guy a bum/ducker if he takes a non title fight

they still happen with regional title holders , like euro champs, but seem almost extinct for world champs. the thais still do them i think

[Wee Tommy]

They were when champs wanted to fight an unranked fighter or come in above the championship limit. Mostly in the days when boxers had a lot more fights.

[scartissue]

It was very common years ago when fighters fought often. Managers, trainers and fighters were always afraid of ring rust and a non-title kept the fighter active and gave him a payday. The last fighters that I can remember who used the non-title in earnest was Roberto Duran and Victor Galindez. In today's game there is more emphasis on gym work and if they fight twice a year it's a big deal. The way I look at it is that the fighter only has maybe a 10 year window to make money. When I see a fighter like Gary Russell who was champ and defended his title once a year for 6 years with no non-titles, I look at a man who missed out on his prime money-making years.

[dagosd2000]

It was very common years ago when fighters fought often. Managers, trainers and fighters were always afraid of ring rust and a non-title kept the fighter active and gave him a payday. The last fighters that I can remember who used the non-title in earnest was Roberto Duran and Victor Galindez. In today's game there is more emphasis on gym work and if they fight twice a year it's a big deal. The way I look at it is that the fighter only has maybe a 10 year window to make money. When I see a fighter like Gary Russell who was champ and defended his title once a year for 6 years with no non-titles, I look at a man who missed out on his prime money-making years.

Dan
I agree with what you say.The only problem I have with a non title fight is when the other guy beats the champ.When Joe Brown was the lightweight champ in the 50's most of his fights were non title goes. He fought a pug named Ray Portilla who had a losing record.Portliia busted Brown's ribs and stopped him. You'd think there was some commission that could have demanded a "real" defense with Portilla but he never got a second chance.



Joe Brown

[p4p1]

It was very common years ago when fighters fought often. Managers, trainers and fighters were always afraid of ring rust and a non-title kept the fighter active and gave him a payday. The last fighters that I can remember who used the non-title in earnest was Roberto Duran and Victor Galindez. In today's game there is more emphasis on gym work and if they fight twice a year it's a big deal. The way I look at it is that the fighter only has maybe a 10 year window to make money. When I see a fighter like Gary Russell who was champ and defended his title once a year for 6 years with no non-titles, I look at a man who missed out on his prime money-making years.

I would love for some kind of analysis to be done on earning potential with fighting once or twice a year vs staying quite active. Obviously if you're only fighting once or twice a year they *should* be bigger names and more lucrative.
It is a job at the end of the day and going through a camp for a non-title fight for less money when losing could hurt your future earning potential probably isn't worth it financially. I always thought fighting 4x or so a year for a champ should be attainable. A couple of gimmies and 1-2 bigger fights.

[Riddick Bowie]

It was very common years ago when fighters fought often. Managers, trainers and fighters were always afraid of ring rust and a non-title kept the fighter active and gave him a payday. The last fighters that I can remember who used the non-title in earnest was Roberto Duran and Victor Galindez. In today's game there is more emphasis on gym work and if they fight twice a year it's a big deal. The way I look at it is that the fighter only has maybe a 10 year window to make money. When I see a fighter like Gary Russell who was champ and defended his title once a year for 6 years with no non-titles, I look at a man who missed out on his prime money-making years.

JC Chavez, James Toney and Roy Jones had a lot of non title fights, they were the most recent that I can think of.

[Controversial]

What fighters lost a non title fight while still champ?

[Woller]

Emile Griffith lost several

[scartissue]

What fighters lost a non title fight while still champ?

Jimmy Carter, Joe Brown, Gus Lesnevich, Tony Zale and Nino Benvenuti immediately spring to mind. I'm sure a lot more as the point of the non-title was coming in over the limit so your title was not at stake and helping you stay sharp. So it was also used to get you into shape for a big fight on the horizon.

[HomicideHenry]

Happened a lot when I was a kid. That way you was able to see world champions on free television on a pretty regular basis. Saw a lot of exhibition matches too growing up.

Personally I think it's a practice that needs to be brought back, that way these guys are basically active. It don't hurt anything facing journeymen or trial horses in between big fights. It sure never hurt Roberto Duran's legacy.

[Caractacus]

Back in th e "Old Old Days" ( pre-1955)
The World Boxing Champions use to tour the country
( and also the world) giving exhibitions
so that the average person could have a chance to see them in action
( there is a whole entire thread on Joe Louis exhibitions
particulary in the 1940's)

[p4p1]

Happened a lot when I was a kid. That way you was able to see world champions on free television on a pretty regular basis. Saw a lot of exhibition matches too growing up.

Personally I think it's a practice that needs to be brought back, that way these guys are basically active. It don't hurt anything facing journeymen or trial horses in between big fights. It sure never hurt Roberto Duran's legacy.

They all took those fights for money. The only exception I have read about was Duran who's love of partying was a major factor in why his team kept him so busy.
If we look at someone like Dempsey who didn't defend for 3 years while champ, I'm sure (I haven't checked) he was doing exhibitions etc during that time making himself more money without having to put in the same amount of work for a proper defence. Being the HW champ allowed him to do that, the guys below HW didn't have that luxury at the time so where much more active.
Guys now make more than enough not to do these fights and if they didn't or don't the alphabet titles are so loose with their rules and rankings that these fights that could have been non-title warm up fights become title fights after the opponent is miraculously ranked #15 the month of the fight.

Having said that though I think champs should fight a minimum of 3-4 times per year unless they're injured. I guess that doesn't factor medical bans into it which could be a factor as well. They only need to fight the #1 contender once every 12 months. Other fights/defences are voluntary. If we can't get title holders to fight that often now, there is no way non-title fights will become a regular thing for champs again.

I think sometimes we as fans forget that it stops being about 'legacy' or having a great record and becomes about money and being able to live comfortably.

[bjornborgbook]

There just isn't enough demand to see a charlo or beterbiev four times a year or even fury spence bud or floyd when he was not fake retired. there is less demand to see boxing now, the big fights generally disappoint and look like soft sparring sessions to build up a potential star.

The sport's integrity has lost a lot of respect and honor since floyd faded away as the former face of the sport. he was the worst ambassador boxing ever had. UFC has far more respect, UFC makes the best vs the best whenever it needs to be done. Boxing has continuously failed to produce the best vs the best. non title fights today would be a band aid.

[zuru]

What fighters lost a non title fight while still champ?

Juan Laporte to Gerald Hayes

[p4p1]

There just isn't enough demand to see a charlo or beterbiev four times a year or even fury spence bud or floyd when he was not fake retired. there is less demand to see boxing now, the big fights generally disappoint and look like soft sparring sessions to build up a potential star.

The sport's integrity has lost a lot of respect and honor since floyd faded away as the former face of the sport. he was the worst ambassador boxing ever had. UFC has far more respect, UFC makes the best vs the best whenever it needs to be done. Boxing has continuously failed to produce the best vs the best. non title fights today would be a band aid.

That's kind of the point I was making though. These guys could fight that often if they wanted to but some of the opponents wouldn't sell PPVs so they would be fighting for far less money for at least a couple of those fights.

I agree about how poor boxing cards are though. First of all the break in between fights is unbearable IMO. The UFC's efficiency in that respect is much better. The promotors don't want to pay guys in the co-main or under any kind of decent money on a PPV show so you don't get to see decently matched fights of a high calibre very often on undercards. Unfortunately it's likely never going to change but we would get much better cards if the pay for undercard fighters was similar to the UFC.

[bjornborgbook]

There just isn't enough demand to see a charlo or beterbiev four times a year or even fury spence bud or floyd when he was not fake retired. there is less demand to see boxing now, the big fights generally disappoint and look like soft sparring sessions to build up a potential star.

The sport's integrity has lost a lot of respect and honor since floyd faded away as the former face of the sport. he was the worst ambassador boxing ever had. UFC has far more respect, UFC makes the best vs the best whenever it needs to be done. Boxing has continuously failed to produce the best vs the best. non title fights today would be a band aid.

That's kind of the point I was making though. These guys could fight that often if they wanted to but some of the opponents wouldn't sell PPVs so they would be fighting for far less money for at least a couple of those fights.

I agree about how poor boxing cards are though. First of all the break in between fights is unbearable IMO. The UFC's efficiency in that respect is much better. The promotors don't want to pay guys in the co-main or under any kind of decent money on a PPV show so you don't get to see decently matched fights of a high calibre very often on undercards. Unfortunately it's likely never going to change but we would get much better cards if the pay for undercard fighters was similar to the UFC.

UFC has done major devastating damage to boxing, especially to the second rate champions. The big boys Canelo, AJ are massive monster draws but after that everyone else struggles, a guy like Beterbiev is truly great but he doesn't earn much money and he fights about once a year. He should be a huge star, like Arguello or Salvador Sanchez from the golden age. I think UFC fans all would be boxing fans if boxing was less corrupt and more like the 70s and 80s and there was no ufc but ufc stole them with a better more trustworthy honest product. Mayweather's fake protected career was catastrophic for boxing and it may never recover from it. I don't see another legit real authentic phenomenom like Tyson, Oscar, Leonard or Ali ever rising up again. Canelo just strikes me as a decent fighter who has been manufactured into a star and he's carefully protected, the mexican fans need an idol so they buy him no matter what.

[Giancarlo]

There just isn't enough demand to see a charlo or beterbiev four times a year or even fury spence bud or floyd when he was not fake retired. there is less demand to see boxing now, the big fights generally disappoint and look like soft sparring sessions to build up a potential star.

The sport's integrity has lost a lot of respect and honor since floyd faded away as the former face of the sport. he was the worst ambassador boxing ever had. UFC has far more respect, UFC makes the best vs the best whenever it needs to be done. Boxing has continuously failed to produce the best vs the best. non title fights today would be a band aid.

That's kind of the point I was making though. These guys could fight that often if they wanted to but some of the opponents wouldn't sell PPVs so they would be fighting for far less money for at least a couple of those fights.

I agree about how poor boxing cards are though. First of all the break in between fights is unbearable IMO. The UFC's efficiency in that respect is much better. The promotors don't want to pay guys in the co-main or under any kind of decent money on a PPV show so you don't get to see decently matched fights of a high calibre very often on undercards. Unfortunately it's likely never going to change but we would get much better cards if the pay for undercard fighters was similar to the UFC.

UFC has done major devastating damage to boxing, especially to the second rate champions. The big boys Canelo, AJ are massive monster draws but after that everyone else struggles, a guy like Beterbiev is truly great but he doesn't earn much money and he fights about once a year. He should be a huge star, like Arguello or Salvador Sanchez from the golden age. I think UFC fans all would be boxing fans if boxing was less corrupt and more like the 70s and 80s and there was no ufc but ufc stole them with a better more trustworthy honest product. Mayweather's fake protected career was catastrophic for boxing and it may never recover from it. I don't see another legit real authentic phenomenom like Tyson, Oscar, Leonard or Ali ever rising up again. Canelo just strikes me as a decent fighter who has been manufactured into a star and he's carefully protected, the mexican fans need an idol so they buy him no matter what.

I'd agree with all the points you make, bjorn

[p4p1]

There just isn't enough demand to see a charlo or beterbiev four times a year or even fury spence bud or floyd when he was not fake retired. there is less demand to see boxing now, the big fights generally disappoint and look like soft sparring sessions to build up a potential star.

The sport's integrity has lost a lot of respect and honor since floyd faded away as the former face of the sport. he was the worst ambassador boxing ever had. UFC has far more respect, UFC makes the best vs the best whenever it needs to be done. Boxing has continuously failed to produce the best vs the best. non title fights today would be a band aid.

That's kind of the point I was making though. These guys could fight that often if they wanted to but some of the opponents wouldn't sell PPVs so they would be fighting for far less money for at least a couple of those fights.

I agree about how poor boxing cards are though. First of all the break in between fights is unbearable IMO. The UFC's efficiency in that respect is much better. The promotors don't want to pay guys in the co-main or under any kind of decent money on a PPV show so you don't get to see decently matched fights of a high calibre very often on undercards. Unfortunately it's likely never going to change but we would get much better cards if the pay for undercard fighters was similar to the UFC.

UFC has done major devastating damage to boxing, especially to the second rate champions. The big boys Canelo, AJ are massive monster draws but after that everyone else struggles, a guy like Beterbiev is truly great but he doesn't earn much money and he fights about once a year. He should be a huge star, like Arguello or Salvador Sanchez from the golden age. I think UFC fans all would be boxing fans if boxing was less corrupt and more like the 70s and 80s and there was no ufc but ufc stole them with a better more trustworthy honest product. Mayweather's fake protected career was catastrophic for boxing and it may never recover from it. I don't see another legit real authentic phenomenom like Tyson, Oscar, Leonard or Ali ever rising up again. Canelo just strikes me as a decent fighter who has been manufactured into a star and he's carefully protected, the mexican fans need an idol so they buy him no matter what.

Hard to disagree with any of what you have written.
Beterbiev should be a star, his fights should be must watch events for even casual fans. The way he just breaks his opponents with brute force is great watching.

[Bodyshot3]

There was definitely a time when a good match-up just sold itself and there did not need to be a belt on the line.
Everyone knew it was quality - the tickets sold - and the winner was going to get a title fight.

But the global governing bodies got greedy and crucially so did the regional folk as well.....here in the UK it used to be the Lonsdale belt and you maybe won an area title to get yourself there.

Kaylor and Christie had a huge fight which was actually just a mere eliminator for the British belt in 1985 and even Lennox Lewis who came far later had some key match-ups with no title on the line, the Mercer fight being a case in point.

[p4p1]

A lot of people presume that Larry Holmes v Marvis Frazier was for the world title but it was actually a non-title fight.

They offered Holmes more to fight the unranked Frazier than they did for most of his defences at the time
I'm sure any fighter now would do the same thing over and over again.

[Riddick Bowie]

A lot of people presume that Larry Holmes v Marvis Frazier was for the world title but it was actually a non-title fight.

Do you mean it wasn't for an alphabet title?

It was 12 rounds and it was the lineal champ fighting. Had Frazier won he would have become lineal champ. So it was for 'the title', even tho a sanctioning body didn't recognise it.

[HomicideHenry]

A lot of people presume that Larry Holmes v Marvis Frazier was for the world title but it was actually a non-title fight.

Do you mean it wasn't for an alphabet title?

It was 12 rounds and it was the lineal champ fighting. Had Frazier won he would have become lineal champ. So it was for 'the title', even tho a sanctioning body didn't recognise it.

The lineal title was on the line. Absolutely true. Holmes would not win a strap until his next fight following Marvis Frazier and that was for the IBF title. In theory, the lineal title is always on the line whether it be an exhibition or otherwise.

I'm reminded of when Joe Louis fought a man named Johnny Davis who was like 3-3-0 as a pro, and the NYSAC declared that at least their version of the world title was on the line, or that they viewed this exhibition match as being a world title match, which pissed Louis off tremendously.

[Grant]

I remember when Tom 'The Bomb' Bethea beat Nino Benvenuti in a Non-Title Fight in Australia. From memory Nino didn't treat it as seriously as he should and was stopped in the late rounds. He then had to give Tom a shot and beat him relatively easily. We have a big Italian community in Australia and the first fight was huge.

[p4p1]

I know it was and I believe still is the case for Australian titles that if the champion is knocked out at the weight limit in a non title fight the winner becomes Australian champion. This doesn’t extend to decisions though.