Do the belts mean anything to you ?

[John]

The belts were created to market fights to people who knew nothing about boxing. They evolved into something else, I'm not sure what. I guess everyone on this forum is a boxing fan so what is your opinion. Please Vote and Comment

[gilgamesh]

Not particularly. They serve a purpose as far as establishing who is truly the top man if he's able to gather multiple titles or whatever, but the very fact that there even are multiple titles in the first place is of course stupid.

If all the belts or all but 1 of them disappeared it wouldn't hurt my feelings at all.

I do get the feeling we are soon to be heading into a direction where there'll be less belts or at least where the belts that exist now will be demoted in status in the eyes of many people.

[PRINCEKOOL]

Do the NBA finals, Super Bowl, Olympics, Grand Slam Tennis, World Championship Athletics, Formula 1 World Championship, World Endurance Racing Championship, Indy Car World Championship, The Masters Golf Championship, mean anything to you? Yes it does.

Note: Titles, and Championships MATTER to the athletes. Those are the facts.

I understand that there is a Lil cult like movement in boxing 'where certain people seem to think titles don't matter. In my opinion those people are not experiencing reality, from an objective perspective. And they are just projecting their frustrations and distorted perceptions on the sport.

General society does not decide what matters. IF all the fighters start out in boxing, with the ambitions to become Champions then that is what matters'.

One of the greatest titles in boxing in my opinion is not even a World title 'it is the British Lonsdale title. The history and prestige which is associated with that title, is almost on a par with any World title' etc.

[giacomino]

No. Four titles in every weight class, minimum. Nice to have for promoters and fighters but about half of the belts are won in set-up fights against nobodies for vacant “titles.” The idea that you have four “champions” in a weight class means there is no single “champion” in a weight class, so the belt is by definition an alphabet belt but only a belt from one of four business entities being paid sanctioning fees. It means nothing to me but it does to promoters and fighters, who can call themselves “world champions” when they win one

[Finkel]

I guess I will vote the top 1. PrinceKool makes a good point about the Longsdale belt.

The oldest person alive today was born the same year the Longsdale belt was first awarded. So, what boxing used to be pre-1909 doesn't really matter all that much in 2026 when most current fighters were born into the 4 belt era.

For me personally, the ladder as a concept is more important to the sport than the belt. As the pro game doesn't really do tournaments like amateur boxing. The belt is just a sign of who is at the top of the ladder. The problem is that concepts, like the ladder and belts, can be corrupted

Is the answer throw away all structures and the fans keep track of who they think is on top? Probably not wise given the media illiteracy of the many, and that fans of specific fighters and nationalities are usually far louder than those of the sport in general. But having said all that Boxing could probably do with less belts at the pinnacle

[Eolaithe]

For a low profile top 15 contender, winning a world title is just the next step up the career ladder — bigger paydays, more visibility, and instant credibility.

Broadcasters push title fights because, unless a boxer is already a star, casual fans only tune in when there’s something allegedly “meaningful” at stake.

Hardcore fans know plenty of alphabet titleholders who aren’t top three talents in their respective divisions, but a belt still makes the fight feel important to the casual boxing audience.

And anyone that appreciates boxing, must support the existence of world titles, because they increase viewership figures and generate revenue. The sport wouldn’t exist without those two things.

[Evander]

They give some meaning to fights, best pick out of them.

[Evander]

We have a ranking system, it's not that complicated.
Thing is, boxing is global sport at world level and you have to do some work to keep up with it.

[NazNaci1]

Maybe once upon a time, when we had 3 but nowadays, its a joke and the rankings even worse.

Intercontinental, Penta, Pan-whatever, WBC / IBF / WBA (insert country name), ditto Regular, Interim, Emiratus in addition to the usual lot is just nonsensical.

If I could, I would scrap all of them and have one world belt, which will never ever happen, or just the 2 or 3 (WBA, WBC and IBF), alongside the more minor ie area (or equivalent), national and European / Pacific, NABF type of thing.

TV / PPV and casuals like a belt on the line but as a purist, its rubbish.

NB- I never begrudge fighters earning more from having belts (TV & Promoters demand it). It shouldn't be that way but it is, so I just accept it and tend to focus on the quality of fighter and ignore the belt status thing.

[Taansend]

I want to click on both the 2nd & 4th options.

[Evander]

Intercontinental, Penta, Pan-whatever, WBC / IBF / WBA (insert country name), ditto Regular, Interim, Emiratus in addition to the usual lot is just nonsensical.

Seconded

[gilgamesh]

I want to click on both the 2nd & 4th options.

Both of those are technically accurate.

2 things can be true at the same time sometimes.

[Thomastearns]

Belts and medals still matter, but only in the amateur ranks.

In professional boxing, it's only the money that counts.

Amateur bouts take next to no time to arrange but professional boxing matchups where the strategy is to wring every last dollar out of the paying fans can take years.

And more years.

In fact, in some instances the legal wrangling over the contracts and purse splits, TV/broadcasting percentages and various rematch/rehydration/ weight clauses can mean the fights only happen once both fighters have run out of all viable options.

Any residual feelings of sentimentality or nostalgia over belts are now confined to a few long term fans and a remaining few delusional fighters.

The only reason why belts have any viability left is because sport is supposedly about competition and, Floyd Mayweather aside, it's still considered undignified to be competing only for the money.

All trophies/belts/medals are now mere relics of a long past sporting amateur age.

Like it or not, we're now in a professional business age.

We can continue to pretend otherwise, admire the bravery, the guts and determination of the competitors, but almost universally these days it's a carefully calculated business transaction.

It's the winners cheque and corporate profits that count.

No amount of "medical justification" can hide the real reason we're seeing mandatory 'rehydration' breaks in the World Cup.

Everyone knows, and if they didn't, they did after watching one happening during a heavy rainstorm.

Corporate greed might one day end up destroying its own golden calf in sport.

Here's an idea, how about turning boxing back into a genuine sport, where champions no longer choose their opponents, once more?

[JCS]

A belt by itself? Usually not..

The fact that a fighter has one or more of a select list of belts? Yes.

[MPW]

I like to think the "world champion" belt still means something to the fighters and a lot of fans, but I'm also a realist and know that fighters chase the largest payday - can't blame them for that - regardless if a title is on the line or not. However, in this day and age of watered down titles due to multiple belts in each weight class of which there are too many, I can see why many people consider them mostly meaningless trinkets.

[Evander]

End of the day ...
We have a ranking system right here on the site.
Might not be to everyones liking.
Don't agree, then come on here and discuss it.
My experience tells me no matter how you slice it and dice it ... you'll still have rankings with bells and whistles but it'll be pretty much the same thing.

[MPW]

End of the day ...
We have a ranking system right here on the site.
Might not be to everyones liking.
Don't agree, then come on here and discuss it.
My experience tells me no matter how you slice it and dice it ... you'll still have rankings with bells and whistles but it'll be pretty much the same thing.

Personally, I use the BoxRec rankings as a guide to gauge where boxers stand in comparison to others in the weight class but not the final word. While they're not perfect - I admit, some make me scratch my head - the rankings are also not random nor arbitrary. For better or worse, the computer formula/algorithm takes the human element out of them, so there is no undue influence from outside factors.

[Evander]

Yeah pretty much

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

- The Belts mean more than the Rats that have run boxing into a 2nd tier sport.

Inanimate Belts being corrupted in the corrupt 21st Century is just a sign of this shyte era...

[gp.]

Do the NBA finals, Super Bowl, Olympics, Grand Slam Tennis, World Championship Athletics, Formula 1 World Championship, World Endurance Racing Championship, Indy Car World Championship, The Masters Golf Championship, mean anything to you? Yes it does.

Note: Titles, and Championships MATTER to the athletes. Those are the facts.

I understand that there is a Lil cult like movement in boxing 'where certain people seem to think titles don't matter. In my opinion those people are not experiencing reality, from an objective perspective. And they are just projecting their frustrations and distorted perceptions on the sport.

General society does not decide what matters. IF all the fighters start out in boxing, with the ambitions to become Champions then that is what matters'.

One of the greatest titles in boxing in my opinion is not even a World title 'it is the British Lonsdale title. The history and prestige which is associated with that title, is almost on a par with any World title' etc.

The events you mention are all regulated by semi-independent governing bodies for the sports in question.

Boxing doesn't have such a thing so any bunch of idiots can get together in an office, think of three letters, and announce they are awarding a title now.

The Lonsdale Belt is regulated by the BBBofC, which, at least in the UK, is a recognised governing body. There is only one British champion at a time.

That's the difference.

[RScarf1]

There is a female boxer named Esneidy Rodriguez Olmos who holds the WIBA atomweight title and is ranked No. 1 in the division by BoxRec, but she does not have a belt from the "big four." She had a WBC Silver title previously. I consider her a legitimate world champion. However, if a boxer wins a belt from the big four because of a biased decision, then I do not consider that boxer to be a legitimate world champion. Also, if a boxer becomes a world champion because of winning against a boxer who is not world-class, then I also do not consider the winner to be a legitimate world champion. Part of the reason why the "big four" are the big four sanctioning bodies is because of the media. In ESPN's ratings, Esneidy is rated, but not as a world champion. If the media does not acknowledge a sanctioning body, then it is harder for a title of that sanctioning body to be considered legitimate.

[PRINCEKOOL]

Do the NBA finals, Super Bowl, Olympics, Grand Slam Tennis, World Championship Athletics, Formula 1 World Championship, World Endurance Racing Championship, Indy Car World Championship, The Masters Golf Championship, mean anything to you? Yes it does.

Note: Titles, and Championships MATTER to the athletes. Those are the facts.

I understand that there is a Lil cult like movement in boxing 'where certain people seem to think titles don't matter. In my opinion those people are not experiencing reality, from an objective perspective. And they are just projecting their frustrations and distorted perceptions on the sport.

General society does not decide what matters. IF all the fighters start out in boxing, with the ambitions to become Champions then that is what matters'.

One of the greatest titles in boxing in my opinion is not even a World title 'it is the British Lonsdale title. The history and prestige which is associated with that title, is almost on a par with any World title' etc.

The events you mention are all regulated by semi-independent governing bodies for the sports in question.

Boxing doesn't have such a thing so any bunch of idiots can get together in an office, think of three letters, and announce they are awarding a title now.

The Lonsdale Belt is regulated by the BBBofC, which, at least in the UK, is a recognised governing body. There is only one British champion at a time.

That's the difference.

Yes the Lonsdale British title is one of the most prestigious titles in the game.

But Boxing also gives the opportunity for people to create new organisations 'that is not entirely a bad thing. Have you got a problem with the UFC? They are essentially just a organisation, and let's get it right? They don't represent the entire sport of Mixed Martial Arts'.

Note: Like I said in my first post? There is a Lil cult in certain boxing circles, which contains people that want to just criticize boxing titles 'when in reality; those organisations create business for the sport and the fighters'.

I have always believed that the fighters also MAKE the titles 'I rate the WBO, AND IBO titles. Quite simply because of the calibre of fighters who have held those titles'.

For a very long time Wladimir Kiltschko held the IBO titles 'and he was the lineal heavyweight champion of the World' etc.

[gilgamesh]

I don't know if these Title belts make business for people. If anything it probably waters down the sport and makes people confused about who the REAL Champions are.

The Lonsdale British title is certainly one of the more prestigious Regional titles In the sport. I like the idea of National and Continental Champions, but having multiple World Champions is now, always has been and always will be stupid, and bad for the sport.

We also have at least 7 too many weight classes.

[giacomino]

I don't know if these Title belts make business for people. If anything it probably waters down the sport and makes people confused about who the REAL Champions are.

The Lonsdale British title is certainly one of the more prestigious Regional titles In the sport. I like the idea of National and Continental Champions, but having multiple World Champions is now, always has been and always will be stupid, and bad for the sport.

We also have at least 7 too many weight classes.

I guess you are part of the “Lil cult” the previous poster mentions. There are very few “real champions,” which is why there is a “Lil cult.” There are mostly alphabet belts, many won in set-up fights by boxers with good managerial connections. And “fans” call them “champions,” although they are “champions” of an alphabet organization, but hardly “the world.” Good for them, I hope they make good money, but it doesn’t make me want to watch/follow the sport as much as I used to

[gilgamesh]

All of Boxing Fandom is a Lil Cult.