BoxRec

I see the Willie Casey - Jason Booth fight last week was for the WBA European title and on allegedly they were saying Matthew Hall v Gary O'Sullivan was for the WBO European title. Surely there are already far too many titles without devaluing them any further.
Some promoters claim that titles help to sell fights. Do they think we are all stupid? It's like selling sausages and calling it steak.
Can anyone on this site name , say, all the WBA world champions without looking it up? Is it any wonder that the general sporting public have little interest in boxing when even the anoraks are confused.

roy wrote:I see the Willie Casey - Jason Booth fight last week was for the WBA European title and on Allegedly channel they were saying Matthew Hall v Gary O'Sullivan was for the WBO European title. Surely there are already far too many titles without devaluing them any further.
Some promoters claim that titles help to sell fights. Do they think we are all stupid? It's like selling sausages and calling it steak.
Can anyone on this site name , say, all the WBA world champions without looking it up? Is it any wonder that the general sporting public have little interest in boxing when even the anoraks are confused.

You are 100% correct mate and there will be plenty more belts to come its all about sanctioning fees and nothing else its just becoming a joke and there is all the international interim titles to come yet and dont forget the LUXEMBOURG International interim British titles I think they will have to present a pair of braces for them coz they wont be able to make enough belts lol and its all in my opinion ( IMO) and I hope they dont make a belt for IMO

Too many belts? Tish-tosh! You can never have too many belts. Each new belt increases the value of all the others by a huge amount...50 or 60 percent would be my estimate! Joe Citizen, standing there with his finger up his nose, wouldn't know it was a boxing match if it didn't have at least three or four title belts at stake.

My gawd, man! Are you mad? Too many belts? Do you realize there is a factory in Gua-dung China running full tilt 24 hours a day to keep up with the demand? Their only fear is the Alphabet Soup Organizations will run out of boxers to award them to.

....we now return you to our regularly scheduled programming on CBC 1.

The titles are a symptom of the real problem: boxing's business model.

To quote the ever-excellent Carlos Acevedo, of The Cruelest Sport blog:

Boxing rarely yields to the wishes of the public. Certainly in America, where there are only four or five box-office blockbusters per year, boxing is virtually consumer-proof. It hardly matters if a ticket sells, a Nielsen point is produced, a pay-per-view is ordered, etc. This is the business model to end all business models, perhaps.

S'true, when you think about it. Al Haymon fighters get millions, & dates on HBO, yet Andre Berto et al don't exactly produce scintillating fights or even sell tickets. Fighters from different promoters meeting are a rarity, these days. PPVs are put on to cater to the smallest number of mugs willing to shell out for them (resulting in truly bizarre shit like that Anthony Mundine vs Bronco McKart PPV the other weekend), & no-one seems to mind.

But the belts definitely add to it, & are the most visible symptom, especially for non-boxing fans.

I was talking to an-MMA head the other day. He expressed interest in boxing, at least on a visceral level, & said whenever he looks at the highlights he always thinks "Fvck yeah, I'll get into that too!" This is more or less the conversation; remember it's with a bright, willing 20-something with time on his hands, disposable income & an inclination to get into the sport. He was all enthusiastic, but then he asked me about the belts Haye fought for the other day...

ME: "Er, I think one of them someone else already owns, & the other's been vacant for years."
HIM: "Right. So the belts are bullshit, then. So how d'you know who the fvck to follow?"
"Well, you can't trust the commentators--"
"Obviously."
"Obviously, yes. You can't trust who holds the belts, because if you don't make money [I couldn't bear to explain the Al Haymon thing I've alluded to above, I was trying to convert him; I didn't wanna scare him away] they'll strip you no matter how good you are."
"Right. So... You can't go off whether or not they've got the belt, you can't go off who you get told is good... How can you tell who's worth watching?"
"Think of it like this: it's a bit like Russian roulette. You keep sticking the oily gun down your throat, & eventually something will blow your head off."
"Hmm. But five out of six times all you're left with is a nasty taste in your mouth?"
"Precisely."

He has yet to sit down & watch a fight with me.

Datsue wrote:The titles are a symptom of the real problem: boxing's business model.

To quote the ever-excellent Carlos Acevedo, of The Cruelest Sport blog:

Boxing rarely yields to the wishes of the public. Certainly in America, where there are only four or five box-office blockbusters per year, boxing is virtually consumer-proof. It hardly matters if a ticket sells, a Nielsen point is produced, a pay-per-view is ordered, etc. This is the business model to end all business models, perhaps.

S'true, when you think about it. Al Haymon fighters get millions, & dates on HBO, yet Andre Berto et al don't exactly produce scintillating fights or even sell tickets. Fighters from different promoters meeting are a rarity, these days. PPVs are put on to cater to the smallest number of mugs willing to shell out for them (resulting in truly bizarre shit like that Anthony Mundine vs Bronco McKart PPV the other weekend), & no-one seems to mind.

But the belts definitely add to it, & are the most visible symptom, especially for non-boxing fans.

I was talking to an-MMA head the other day. He expressed interest in boxing, at least on a visceral level, & said whenever he looks at the highlights he always thinks "Fvck yeah, I'll get into that too!" This is more or less the conversation; remember it's with a bright, willing 20-something with time on his hands, disposable income & an inclination to get into the sport. He was all enthusiastic, but then he asked me about the belts Haye fought for the other day...

ME: "Er, I think one of them someone else already owns, & the other's been vacant for years."
HIM: "Right. So the belts are bullshit, then. So how d'you know who the fvck to follow?"
"Well, you can't trust the commentators--"
"Obviously."
"Obviously, yes. You can't trust who holds the belts, because if you don't make money [I couldn't bear to explain the Al Haymon thing I've alluded to above, I was trying to convert him; I didn't wanna scare him away] they'll strip you no matter how good you are."
"Right. So... You can't go off whether or not they've got the belt, you can't go off who you get told is good... How can you tell who's worth watching?"
"Think of it like this: it's a bit like Russian roulette. You keep sticking the oily gun down your throat, & eventually something will blow your head off."
"Hmm. But five out of six times all you're left with is a nasty taste in your mouth?"
"Precisely."

He has yet to sit down & watch a fight with me.

I think the only way boxings business model is going to change Datsue is if some multi billionaire ie Roman Abramovich when he first took over Chelsea and pumped a ton of money into the club decides to come into boxing and buys out all the sanctioning bodies and creates or leaves one version of the world title and then signs all the the best boxers in the world to his company and has them all fight each other! Depending on their respective weight classes obviously. Monopolies are never good for an industry but I think that the UFC in mma has done a good job from the fans point of you in that respect.

Cap wrote:Too many belts? Tish-tosh! You can never have too many belts. Each new belt increases the value of all the others by a huge amount...50 or 60 percent would be my estimate! Joe Citizen, standing there with his finger up his nose, wouldn't know it was a boxing match if it didn't have at least three or four title belts at stake.

My gawd, man! Are you mad? Too many belts? Do you realize there is a factory in Gua-dung China running full tilt 24 hours a day to keep up with the demand? Their only fear is the Alphabet Soup Organizations will run out of boxers to award them to.

....we now return you to our regularly scheduled programming on CBC 1.

Nice one lol

leftysreturn wrote:

Datsue wrote:The titles are a symptom of the real problem: boxing's business model.

To quote the ever-excellent Carlos Acevedo, of The Cruelest Sport blog:

Boxing rarely yields to the wishes of the public. Certainly in America, where there are only four or five box-office blockbusters per year, boxing is virtually consumer-proof. It hardly matters if a ticket sells, a Nielsen point is produced, a pay-per-view is ordered, etc. This is the business model to end all business models, perhaps.

S'true, when you think about it. Al Haymon fighters get millions, & dates on HBO, yet Andre Berto et al don't exactly produce scintillating fights or even sell tickets. Fighters from different promoters meeting are a rarity, these days. PPVs are put on to cater to the smallest number of mugs willing to shell out for them (resulting in truly bizarre shit like that Anthony Mundine vs Bronco McKart PPV the other weekend), & no-one seems to mind.

But the belts definitely add to it, & are the most visible symptom, especially for non-boxing fans.

I was talking to an-MMA head the other day. He expressed interest in boxing, at least on a visceral level, & said whenever he looks at the highlights he always thinks "Fvck yeah, I'll get into that too!" This is more or less the conversation; remember it's with a bright, willing 20-something with time on his hands, disposable income & an inclination to get into the sport. He was all enthusiastic, but then he asked me about the belts Haye fought for the other day...

ME: "Er, I think one of them someone else already owns, & the other's been vacant for years."
HIM: "Right. So the belts are bullshit, then. So how d'you know who the fvck to follow?"
"Well, you can't trust the commentators--"
"Obviously."
"Obviously, yes. You can't trust who holds the belts, because if you don't make money [I couldn't bear to explain the Al Haymon thing I've alluded to above, I was trying to convert him; I didn't wanna scare him away] they'll strip you no matter how good you are."
"Right. So... You can't go off whether or not they've got the belt, you can't go off who you get told is good... How can you tell who's worth watching?"
"Think of it like this: it's a bit like Russian roulette. You keep sticking the oily gun down your throat, & eventually something will blow your head off."
"Hmm. But five out of six times all you're left with is a nasty taste in your mouth?"
"Precisely."

He has yet to sit down & watch a fight with me.

I think the only way boxings business model is going to change Datsue is if some multi billionaire ie Roman Abramovich when he first took over Chelsea and pumped a ton of money into the club decides to come into boxing and buys out all the sanctioning bodies and creates or leaves one version of the world title and then signs all the the best boxers in the world to his company and has them all fight each other! Depending on their respective weight classes obviously. Monopolies are never good for an industry but I think that the UFC in mma has done a good job from the fans point of you in that respect.

Agree. Would love to be that billionaire.

I think in the US they have been too focused on the next Ali, Ray Leonard... and they've built guys up and fed them stiffs. But boxing is best when there are a cast of characters and they all fight one another, winning some and losing others. This makes it exciting. Some US Olympian, pampered, with an unbeaten record...coasting to decision victories... Getting their 7 rounds in the bag and shutting up shop...

If you want to play a fun game, look at a current 'world champion' in any division and then grab any copy of The Ring from, I don't know, say 1990, and go over the top 10 in said division. More often than not you have to question whether the current world champ would even crack the top 10 back then. Honestly, the decline in skilled, tough, gritty, big hitting fighters is savage and frightening.

Look at the light-welters from 1990 - Chavez, Taylor, Whitaker, Rosario, Camacho, Davis, Ramirez... scary place to be.

loaded_gloves wrote:If you want to play a fun game, look at a current 'world champion' in any division and then grab any copy of The Ring from, I don't know, say 1990, and go over the top 10 in said division. More often than not you have to question whether the current world champ would even crack the top 10 back then. Honestly, the decline in skilled, tough, gritty, big hitting fighters is savage and frightening.

Look at the light-welters from 1990 - Chavez, Taylor, Whitaker, Rosario, Camacho, Davis, Ramirez... scary place to be.

In fact, let's play that game now. Middleweight top 10, The Ring March 1990. You've got Michael Nunn, Roberto Duran, Mike McCallum, Sumbu Kalambay, and Iran Barkley, not to mention Michael Watson, Steve Collins and Herol Graham also in there.

Anyone think Sergio Martinez and Chavez Jnr are fighting each other for the title in that pack? Do they even reach the top 10? I would say no and no.

But dont forget youre looking back at a completed career. Also, thats a freakish top ten to have. Scary.
And just to be objectionable i would put martinez firmly in tje top ten.

Definitely a big part of the problem - what annoys me is apart from small hall masters/area titles/ce;tic titles we werent pretty bad 2 or so years ago (on TV and such) in this country - area>english/celtic>british>ebu european etc but now more and more big british fights are being fought (i partly blame Sky and so for this too) for "intercontinental" titles.

Quigg Vs Munroe was a prime example - that was a British title fight, yet was fought for an intercontinental bauble - a few years ago Sky wouldn't have let that happen, for a couple of years they only had British/Commonwealth or European titles headline theyre Friday Fight Nights (the only exception I can think of was Fury McDermott for the English)

I believe in having 4 major world titles, it stops the corruption and monopoly of a single organisation, it also gives fighters from all over the world a route to top level boxing. I don't agree with all the diamond, silver, regular, super, international, intercontinental etc.... nonsense though. We only have to look at the pre-eighties eras to see that less titles meant better champions, and the EBU, Commonwealth, national, Area titles were more prestigious. WBA European, International Masters, WBO European, British Masters, IBC, WBF, WBU etc... are all nonsense, worthless titles.

Because there isn't much boxing on mainstream TV, these titles get bums on seats. In the old days, an opportunist, a journeyman and a local puncher or slickster would all fill halls, arenas and make the papers without a title on the line.

Most people I speak to stopped watching boxing when Eubank and Benn finished up. They think boxers aren't as good anymore. I live in Nottingham and most people don't know who Carl Froch is.

loaded_gloves wrote:If you want to play a fun game, look at a current 'world champion' in any division and then grab any copy of The Ring from, I don't know, say 1990, and go over the top 10 in said division. More often than not you have to question whether the current world champ would even crack the top 10 back then. Honestly, the decline in skilled, tough, gritty, big hitting fighters is savage and frightening.

Look at the light-welters from 1990 - Chavez, Taylor, Whitaker, Rosario, Camacho, Davis, Ramirez... scary place to be.

Just thought I'd add that Richard Gutierrez fought for the WBC youth title last week. And he's 34.... :??

i think that mma,ufc are slowly killing boxing ! many pals of mine who were staunch and loyal boxing fans have stepped over to the mma scene cos their thoughts are the champions in that fight each other ! wereas boxing the days of the eight divisions have gone and too many world champions,im slowly warming to the mma myself but boxing will always be my number one !

a bigger problem is promoters not working together.

as we've seen with this whole floyd-pac top rank/golden boy feud mess.

f*ck the sanctioning bodies.

Its unfair to let the Golden Boy of British Boxing Eddie Hearn not get a mention on this thread!! He has started advertising Intercontinental & International fights as "Title Fights" on his shows with tonights ‘London Calling’ event having a grand total of 5 Title fights. Which would look great on paper to the unknowledgeable new crowd which he is trying to appeal to.

ShadrachSimmo wrote:Just thought I'd add that Richard Gutierrez fought for the WBC youth title last week. And he's 34.... :??

Weirdboxing made a great point about the WBC "Youth" Middleweight title reign of Zurdo...the average age of his challengers is like 33
http://www.weirdboxing.info/2/post/2012 ... hting.html

I remember Carl Daniels challenging for a WBC 'Youth' belt when he was about 40. Larry Donald was once some sort of WBC Latino heavyweight champ.

loaded_gloves wrote:I remember Carl Daniels challenging for a WBC 'Youth' belt when he was about 40. Larry Donald was once some sort of WBC Latino heavyweight champ.

Sherman Williams is like the WBC China Zone champion

On the Klitschko bill tonight there's a match for the vacant WBC Baltic Silver title. These "Silver" titles are a particularly welcome innovation for a sport lacking in titles.