How does everyone view the IBA WORLD TITLE

[biglefthook]

.?

[David.skold]

Not.

[gilgamesh]

Absolutely meaningless, like pretty much all the belts.

The Big 4 are the only ones that KINDA matter, and even 3 of them don't REALLY matter most of the time.

But even if you were ranking the trinkets. I don't know if the IBA Title would make the Top 20 in terms of significance.

Even stuff like the IBO, WBC Silver Title, WBA Interim, The EBU European Title, and stuff lilke that are more important.

The IBA Title is meaningless. I literally couldn't tell you who holds that title in any of the weight classes at the moment.

I know James Toney had it once at Heavyweight, that's about it.

[littlepug]

Never heard of it, I prefer to concentrate on the fights

[Enlightened-One]

How does everyone view the IBA WORLD TITLE?

According to the official IBA website, there are seventeen weight classes and the championship is vacant for fifteen of them.

They only have two champions, with both men gaining their belts by competing for the vacant championship.

One of their champions, Mark DeLuca, is still listed as the IBA titleholder, despite losing his first title defence last weekend.

The cruiserweight limit is 190lbs, which differs from the 200lbs used by the other governing bodies.

There’s also a super cruiserweight division, which has a stipulated weight limit of 210lbs, which none of the other governing bodies have.

One of the IBA’s dodgiest practices relates to the fact that they don’t use ratings, which means that they don’t have any specific criteria for determining whom is deemed as being a qualified title challenger.

For instance: Anthony Lenk was allowed to challenge for the vacant IBA belt against Mark DeLuca, despite losing three of his previous four fights, with his only victory in one of those bouts coming against a journeyman that had himself only won two out of 13 contests over a 7½ year period.

I’m actually a little shocked that someone has decided to ascertain the thoughts of fellow forum members about their opinion of the IBA, since it seems to be pretty much a defunct organisation.

[RScarf1]

The IBA had some notable champions such as Floyd Mayweather, but this belt was usually not the only one for their fights. It was like what the IBO does now with having their champions also holding a belt from a major sanctioning body. However, it used to be significant for the women because the IBA was one of the first to sanction women's boxing. Holly Holm was one of their champions. On her boxrec page, you can see Holm holding the IBA belt. The major sanctioning bodies getting involved in women's boxing has made the IBA irrelevant. The IBA now has a rankings list on their website for men and women.

[Enlightened-One]

The IBA had some notable champions such as Floyd Mayweather, but this belt was usually not the only one for their fights.

According to the official website, the IBA currently only has two champions, both captured vacant titles and only one of them has a winning record.

The IBA now has a rankings list on their website for men and women.

Are there two sets of IBA organisations, because if there isn't, then I can say with supreme confidence that they don’t even use rankings?

So there aren’t any rankings listed on their official website and you won't be able to find any reference to them, because the IBA doesn’t even use them. In fact their rules clearly state the following:

"Moreover, challengers to IBA titles are not chosen based on their world ranking, which may or may not be deserved. Rather, the right to challenge for a title is awarded to fighters who deserve, based on their boxing accomplishments..."

And as I stated earlier on in this thread:

Anthony Lenk was allowed to challenge for the vacant IBA belt against Mark DeLuca, despite losing three of his previous four fights, with his only victory in one of those bouts coming against a journeyman that had himself only won two out of 13 contests over a 7½ year period.

Another example relates to a bout that took place couple of months ago, between Nico Hernandez and Szilveszter Kanalas, who squared off to fight for the vacant IBA flyweight championship, have you seen their resumes? Nothing more needs to be said!

In my opinion, it’s incredibly dodgy for the IBA to not use a ratings-based system, because it results in them not having any specific criteria for determining whom they deem as being a qualified title challenger (as per the aforementioned bouts).

The IBA doesn’t have any credibility and it’s ludicrous to pretend otherwise.

[leejonesjnr]

Whilst I accept that the order is generally

WBA Super / WBC / IBF
then
WBA Regular / WBO
then
IBO
then
Everything else

I am basically of the opinion that if it is good enough for RJJ then it is good enough for me!

I have noticed that the IBA titles are being contested more in Europe recently where they were at one time very much a US only body

[littlepug]

Whilst I accept that the order is generally

WBA Super / WBC / IBF
then
WBA Regular / WBO
then
IBO
then
Everything else

I am basically of the opinion that if it is good enough for RJJ then it is good enough for me!

I have noticed that the IBA titles are being contested more in Europe recently where they were at one time very much a US only body

I would say,
WBC
WBA super
IBF
WBO
Everything else
To give even a slight nod to anything else isnt good for the sport.

[leejonesjnr]

Whilst I accept that the order is generally

WBA Super / WBC / IBF
then
WBA Regular / WBO
then
IBO
then
Everything else

I am basically of the opinion that if it is good enough for RJJ then it is good enough for me!

I have noticed that the IBA titles are being contested more in Europe recently where they were at one time very much a US only body

I would say,
WBC
WBA super
IBF
WBO
Everything else
To give even a slight nod to anything else isnt good for the sport.

I suspect that the common view is more in line with my rankings than yours but opinions vary and of course there are always exceptions brought about by the Champion that holds a particular belt.

[Perseus]

How does everyone view the IBA WORLD TITLE?

According to the official IBA website, there are seventeen weight classes and the championship is vacant for fifteen of them.

They only have two champions, with both men gaining their belts by competing for the vacant championship.

One of their champions, Mark DeLuca, is still listed as the IBA titleholder, despite losing his first title defence last weekend.

The cruiserweight limit is 190lbs, which differs from the 200lbs used by the other governing bodies.

There’s also a super cruiserweight division, which has a stipulated weight limit of 210lbs, which none of the other governing bodies have.

One of the IBA’s dodgiest practices relates to the fact that they don’t use ratings, which means that they don’t have any specific criteria for determining whom is deemed as being a qualified title challenger.

For instance: Anthony Lenk was allowed to challenge for the vacant IBA belt against Mark DeLuca, despite losing three of his previous four fights, with his only victory in one of those bouts coming against a journeyman that had himself only won two out of 13 contests over a 7½ year period.

I’m actually a little shocked that someone has decided to ascertain the thoughts of fellow forum members about their opinion of the IBA, since it seems to be pretty much a defunct organisation.

LOL.
It appears that the prizefighters barely recognize this organization.
No reason for the fans to acknowledge it.

[Perseus]

I rate the various belts as follows:

WBC, WBA super, IBF and WBO all on equal ground these days.

WBA regular when there is no primary title holder present. If there is no super champ out there then the regular champ holds the highest belt.

IBO is gaining ground but still well below the big four.

When the linear champion and The Ring champion are the same person The Ring belt has merit but has otherwise went downhill imo.

[Enlightened-One]

IBO is gaining ground but still well below the big four.

What makes you think that?

Nearly all of their champions gain their belts by competing for a vacant title, less than half of them are rated in the top-ten by ESPN or The RING, at least one of their competitors in almost half of their title bouts are on a losing streak, many of their champions are anonymous and a disproportionate amount of their champions/challengers are from South Africa.

[Perseus]

IBO is gaining ground but still well below the big four.

What makes you think that?

Nearly all of their champions gain their belts by competing for a vacant title, less than half of them are rated in the top-ten by ESPN or The RING, at least one of their competitors in almost half of their title bouts are on a losing streak, many of their champions are anonymous and a disproportionate amount of their champions/challengers are from South Africa.

Baby steps EO baby steps.............................they are still well below the big four.

Everything you said is true.
Many of their champs are anonymous but not ALL of them. There are some top fighters sitting on IBO belts(Joshua, GGG, Hurd).

IBO has finally sponsored the IBHOF and like the rest of the belts that sponsor the hall they will be a title recognized by the IBHOF.
Not so long ago(3-5 years) the various boxing websites did not list IBO title holders in their "champions" section. That is slowly changing, this site lists them now as does BS.
I'm sure there are more but I'm not to going look up all of them. You will read this post and won't be able to resist looking them up yourself, no need for me to bother with it. I've already given two that omitted IBO titlists in the past if you find just one more that currently lists them that should be enough to confirm my statement..

[gilgamesh]

Essentially these meaningless title belts, crown a Champion when a promoter decides he wants to pay the IBA to make his mediocre fight a "Title" fight.

All "World" Titles are basically bought and paid for to some degree, but these are especially, and the organization doesn't even try to hide this fact.

As others have said there's absolutely no criteria by which they would even ATTEMPT to look like an actual organization with standards.

[RScarf1]

Are there two sets of IBA organisations, because if there isn't, then I can say with supreme confidence that they don’t even use rankings?

http://www.internationalboxingassociation.com/ranking/

[Lackeos]

I'm someone who acknowledges the IBO as being relatively real, and because of the sh*t that the big 4 often pull, I think IBO is at least as good as those sh*t organizations.

So now that we've established my generosity towards the IBO; I consider the IBA, WBF, WBU, and IBC titles to be totally irrelevant. They might as well not exist.

[RScarf1]

I'm someone who acknowledges the IBO as being relatively real, and because of the sh*t that the big 4 often pull, I think IBO is at least as good as those sh*t organizations.

So now that we've established my generosity towards the IBO; I consider the IBA, WBF, WBU, and IBC titles to be totally irrelevant. They might as well not exist.

They used to be a lot more relevant. The IBC had televised world title fights in the '90s. When the WBC, WBA, WBO, and IBF began having minor titles such as Intercontinental and International, those titles were instantly more desirable than even world titles from the IBA, IBC, etc. because they are steppingstones to world titles with the major sanctioning bodies. It is almost impossible for an organization to compete with the big four because of this. The IBO has been in business for a while and may be able to get into the exclusive club in the future. The women's boxing organizations are nearly irrelevant for the same reasons. The women want belts from the same organizations as the men and there are also minor belts, so the only way that an organization such as the WIBF can stay in business is by usually having title fights in Germany where they can have biased judging and therefore keep their champion fighting in Germany and the people know it's a farce, but they will still buy tickets anyway and are just happy to have a "world champion" representing Germany.

[Enlightened-One]

Are there two sets of IBA organisations, because if there isn't, then I can say with supreme confidence that they don’t even use rankings?

http://www.internationalboxingassociation.com/ranking/

As I stated earlier, the IBA doesn’t use rankings to determine who challenges for their world titles.

I quoted their rules, which stated this, and their stance is even supported by the calibre of fighters that have fought for their titles.

Look at the date and the names listed in the URL you supplied – these out-of-date rankings are from August 2017 and not only includes retired boxers, but it also lists fighters rated above opponents that they suffered defeats to.

I honestly don't know why you submitted that post, because it seems as though you didn't even read the webpage prior to posting it.

[RScarf1]

Are there two sets of IBA organisations, because if there isn't, then I can say with supreme confidence that they don’t even use rankings?

http://www.internationalboxingassociation.com/ranking/

As I stated earlier, the IBA doesn’t use rankings to determine who challenges for their world titles.

I quoted their rules, which stated this, and their stance is even supported by the calibre of fighters that have fought for their titles.

Look at the date and the names listed in the URL you supplied – these out-of-date rankings are from August 2017 and not only includes retired boxers, but it also lists fighters rated above opponents that they suffered defeats to.

I honestly don't know why you submitted that post, because it seems as though you didn't even read the webpage prior to posting it.

I honestly did not realize that it wasn't up to date and that it's from last year. They are still ranking Andre Ward. How can they use rankings to decide who fights for their titles when the rankings are not current? They obviously don't as you stated. These kinds of sanctioning bodies can't attract top talent anymore except for women's boxing. The WBF (Federation, not Foundation) has world-class boxers for their female champions, but not often for the men (usually only one in the top 30 of a division).

[Enlightened-One]

http://www.internationalboxingassociation.com/ranking/

As I stated earlier, the IBA doesn’t use rankings to determine who challenges for their world titles.

I quoted their rules, which stated this, and their stance is even supported by the calibre of fighters that have fought for their titles.

Look at the date and the names listed in the URL you supplied – these out-of-date rankings are from August 2017 and not only includes retired boxers, but it also lists fighters rated above opponents that they suffered defeats to.

I honestly don't know why you submitted that post, because it seems as though you didn't even read the webpage prior to posting it.

I honestly did not realize that it wasn't up to date and that it's from last year. They are still ranking Andre Ward. How can they use rankings to decide who fights for their titles when the rankings are not current? They obviously don't as you stated. These kinds of sanctioning bodies can't attract top talent anymore except for women's boxing.

I agree - The IBA are clearly a dodgy organisation who can’t be bothered to update their website.

[chinarich]

Don “Moose” Lewis is the king of the two-bit orgs, he has the IBA, the IBU and what he claims is the true successor to the original WBU...