BoxRec

I really dont get how both Froch and Ward are WBA Super World Super middleweight champion, I get the whole Interim and World and Super World tiltle thing and understand how stupid it is but this is another level, how can 2 people have exacltley the same belt ???

It's just one of those crap anomalies as Froch became their "Super" champ when he beat Kessler for his "regular" WBA title whilst defending his IBF title.

Ward was in the same position after beating Kessler, although I don't know why it was upgraded to a "super" belt from a regular one as there was no unification done at that point.

I think at the moment there's no regular WBA holder but there is an interim holder.

Mo' belts=Mo' money. That simple.

I'm having to get my facepalm gif out at a rate of once a day at the mo. I swear we have had a thread on this once a day for the last week!

Froch is 'unified' champion, just that the schedule doesn't recognise this and has both down as fighting for the 'super' title.

expe wrote:Froch is 'unified' champion, just that the schedule doesn't recognise this and has both down as fighting for the 'super' title.

What exactly is the "unified" champion?!

shouldn't ward have been downgraded to 'regular' wba champ when he had the wbc belt taken away?

The WBA is the worst sanctioning body out there now IMO.

columbo wrote:

expe wrote:Froch is 'unified' champion, just that the schedule doesn't recognise this and has both down as fighting for the 'super' title.

What exactly is the "unified" champion?!

Someone who has unified the WBA title with another belt, but there's already a super champion, a situation the WBA either failed to recognise when bringing in super titles or ignored for money reasons. In truth, Froch is IBF champion and that's it, he can claim he's unified titles, but we all know he hasn't.

If the WBA have a Super,Regular,Interim and now this Unified title i knew nothing about until a fortnight ago,i assumed Froch was Super champ as Ward had been stripped of both his belts?

Anyway this Unified title?? does that mean the WBA are making more money off other organisations belts as they need one of their belts to make it Unified :??

No, you have to pay a fee to fight for or defend a belt. The WBA don't get any more money from the WBC or whatever, the WBC get their fees. I can't be bothered to check but it's usually a flat fee to a certain level but obviously a unification fight tends to be much higher profile ergo more money on the line so potentially more fees.

Obviously four belts at one weight = four lots of fees, multiple times a year (x 18 weights) > one belt, one or two fees a year per division.

Just the sport sorry business of boxing to get more sanction fees, same with Quigg tomorrow they will be hyping that he is the champion when in reality he's a paper champion and Rigondeaux is the real champ, until he loses or vacates.

In theory, because there's 3 other belts, the WBA could have a 'super' champion, then a 'unified' champion, then another 'unified' champion, plus a 'regular' champion and an interim champion all in one division. That's 4 world champions and an interim champion.

They could have eight, there's no reason why you can't have an interim any belt holder, in theory. Granted it's stretching even their "logic" to absurd extremes.