I believe that this discussion warrants a new topic...
I shall refresh you lads with my opinion, if you happened to miss it.
I believe the regional titles are a BAD idea.
Fopr a few reasons:
1. We are putting restrictions on what fighters can and cannot fight for.
2. The glaring flaw in introducing Regional Titles is that some regions will have tougher opponents than other regions...
This means that some boxers will have to defeat a better standard of opposition than others just to have a title of equal importance.
This is not fair... For instace:
A lot of great boxers this season are Mexican... Whereas another region's title will be easier top win because of the lower standard of opposition.
***
I believe hat every boxer should have the right to challenge for any title...
Okay, I admit, a boxer ranked #32 shouldn't be given a shot in a title eliminator for any of the big 4 titles...
But I see that as just honouring the rankings system,
not allowing nationality to dictate the terms of our title fights...
I do understand the reason for including the regional titles though, managers want to give the lower ranked fighter look-ins for titles...
But I believe that this problem can be solved very easily...
Why not include another universal world title, that every fighter can fight for...
Maybe the IBO title... It is held in similar regard to the WBU title...
And if that is not enough, maybe include the WBF title as well...
That will give the lower ranked fighter (20 and below) 3 titles to fight for...
And because things aren't being broken up according to region, it means that the playing ground is level and that everyone from week 1 onward will be starting on an even kneel.
The best thing that can be said about my idea is:
It means that every fighter is available to fight for every title.
Thoughts? gentlmen.
