Page 1 of 1
CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 09 Dec 2011, 17:28
by loaded_gloves
Good God.
Somebody called Gennedy Golovkin is apparently the WBA middleweight champ.
Felix Sturm is somehow the 'super champ', despite the fact that according to the WBA's own moronic rules you must combine the WBA belt with another to be 'elevated' to super champ status.
Sturm has not done this and yet he is super champ anyway, and the other guy is ALSO champ.
HOW???
I wish death on every single member of the WBA sanctioning body. What a bunch of criminals!
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 09 Dec 2011, 17:32
by iamasadlittleboy
Sturm is the "super" champion
Golovkin the "regular" champion
N'da n'jikam the "interim" champion
Basically...so the WBA can collect 3 sets of sanctioning fees...as good as Golovkin is (I feel he's over-rated but still...) he is technically as much of a paper champion as paper champions can be.
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 09 Dec 2011, 17:53
by loaded_gloves
But Sturm only has the WBA belt - by the WBA's own rules he cannot qualify as a 'super champion'!!!
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 09 Dec 2011, 17:55
by LeedsLad
There's nothing criminal about it.
It's supply and demand - fighters want more titles to allow them to make more money without having to take risks. Said organisation is happy to sacrifice credibility in order to supply more titles and in return receive a slice of the cake.
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 09 Dec 2011, 18:09
by Quixall
It's got to the stage where titles mean nothing at all.............
People know who the guys are at each division, so you could get everybody at 140lbs to give up their title and people would still say "Khan and Bradley", you could get everyone to give up their title at 147lbs and people will still say "Mayweather and Pacquaio" and so on and so forth. I think it must be confusing for the "casual" sports fan, but for us on here, we have enough knowledge to see past all the baubles, belts and bull crap and know what is what regarding who the guys are without the need of a championship belt to quantify that opinion. It's the way it's going now, first of all it was multi boxing organisations, then it was more weight divisions an now it's multi belts on offer signifying differing levels of achievement. I can understand it from a financial point for the governing bodies in terms of sanctioning fees and also for the fighters who gain by it, but ultimately for the real fans of boxing it dilutes a boxers status and undermines the whole point of looking for the best fighter in each divsion, in a way that is universal and everyone can comprehend, not just the diehard fans.
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 09 Dec 2011, 18:13
by iamasadlittleboy
loaded_gloves wrote:But Sturm only has the WBA belt - by the WBA's own rules he cannot qualify as a 'super champion'!!!
The WBA have 2 separate "super" title rules, 1 where a fighter unifies and 1 where a fighter defends 5 times...you're better off ignoring the rules and just accepting the WBA's retarded decisions.
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 09 Dec 2011, 18:35
by loaded_gloves
Quixall wrote:I think it must be confusing for the "casual" sports fan, but for us on here, we have enough knowledge to see past all the baubles, belts and bull crap and know what is what regarding who the guys are without the need of a championship belt to quantify that opinion.
The problem is we're a minority of hardcores and even most of us don't know who is who. The casual sports fan, the millions of them who used to watch this shit on ITV and BBC, are completely alienated.
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 09 Dec 2011, 18:47
by Quixall
loaded_gloves wrote:Quixall wrote:I think it must be confusing for the "casual" sports fan, but for us on here, we have enough knowledge to see past all the baubles, belts and bull crap and know what is what regarding who the guys are without the need of a championship belt to quantify that opinion.
The problem is we're a minority of hardcores and even most of us don't know who is who. The casual sports fan, the millions of them who used to watch this shit on ITV and BBC, are completely alienated.
Completely agree

Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 09 Dec 2011, 19:45
by Dan Dares
I just ignore all that sanctioning bollocks. As far as I'm concerned, sanctioning bodies and promoters are part of the media, and collectively, they are sucking too much money out of boxing, and doing a piss poor job of making sure that boxers get a fair deal financially.
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 09 Dec 2011, 20:03
by Matt W
Because they are a bunch of scumbag leeches that couldn't give a fornicate about the sport?
Those belts are well ugly anyway and as if they need devaluing any further anybody can buy one:
http://www.masisboxingbelts.com/custom.htm
Give me a Lonsdale Belt or Olympic medal any day of the week.
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 09 Dec 2011, 20:39
by stujones
loaded_gloves wrote:But Sturm only has the WBA belt - by the WBA's own rules he cannot qualify as a 'super champion'!!!
Same happened with Andre Ward, same happens with Miguel Cotto - its been happening for a while,
What more silly is with the WBA Super Middleweight champion.
Ward super champion.
Sartison was regular champion - got injured so formed an interim title (won by Magee).
The WBA decide to strip Sartison - and form a vacant WBA title fight NOT INVOLVING MAGEE!.
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 10 Dec 2011, 01:32
by Deserter
Whichever way you look at it, iGolovkin looks like he's the real deal based on last night's performance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiypsNRoLk8
On a related note, proof of how this mad situation is devaluing everything is the setting for that fight - I've seen amateur bouts that have more atmosphere and a bigger attendance than that 'world title' bout.
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 10 Dec 2011, 06:19
by loaded_gloves
Look at the fight! It's like an off-TV, 8 round bout between two prospects - NOT a world title fight! What sort of chump change will the WBA make from this farce? And for what damage to their image and overall market value?
Oh to resurrect George Benton. He would literally own so many middleweight world title belts in this era he wouldn't have enough trousers to wear them with.
Re: CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY THERE ARE 2 WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPS?
Posted: 10 Dec 2011, 14:59
by MightyWarrior
Deserter wrote:Whichever way you look at it, iGolovkin looks like he's the real deal based on last night's performance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiypsNRoLk8
On a related note, proof of how this mad situation is devaluing everything is the setting for that fight - I've seen amateur bouts that have more atmosphere and a bigger attendance than that 'world title' bout.
Ridiculous of course, and as a result, "world champ" Golovkin fights in front of a crowd that he could probably fit in his front room. he must wonder if he's really in a world title fight, as it looks like a small hall opening fight of the evening. Just BIZZARE.
And he's a fantastic talent too, a feared amateur who was flattening fighters like Lucien Bite for fun. Love to see him step up - Strum seems a natural fight to make.