BoxRec

What would be the best way to reduce the amount of belts in boxing to create a greater legitimacy for Boxing as a whole

Enough of the top guys have to get together and say fornicate this belt, not worth the fees, and compare it to the IBO. but it would need a fair few of them to get together. If every one on the ring p4p list said "fornicate the WBO, Ill never pay there fees, its a secondary belt" then i think that would be a hit the WBO could not take.

Then the other belts would have to agree and band together against counting it in undisputed, and unification ect.

Very very unlikely. I honestly think its more likely the IBO be elevated than another demoted, it makes no sense but promoters love having belts to make "world title fights" (the promoters could get together and get rid of one, only take toprank, PBC, matchroom, and golden boy to agree, but they love belts)....

Mangoraj wrote: ↑13 Jul 2021, 05:09 What would be the best way to reduce the amount of belts in boxing to create a greater legitimacy for Boxing as a whole

To kill Sulaiman, to cut his ear off and to send it to Mendoza on the WBA 100 year anniversary.

They should combine the WBA, WBC AND IBF into one body. Put the current owners on a board. Screw the Os.
No Super, Silver, Interim, champ i n recess, etc.
No new weight classes. They can keep the Super Welter etc. That's good for boxers.
One champ in each division. Period.
This would save boxing.

It would take the members, president, CEOs, board members etc. to unify the organisations. Shall we infiltrate?

Other than that, it would take boxing to become mainstream. If more people knew about boxing, the belts effectiveness as a promotional tool would diminish.

Alternatively, it would take an agreement between two or more of the major promotional companies to boycott one, more or all of the belts. Therefore leaving the organisations financially screwed unless they act on the promoter's demands. This is unlikely because the promoter's use the belts for the same purpose as the orgs.

One thing I always thought wouldve been significant would be if the number one star, or all of the top boxers, simply refused to pay sanctioning fees. Imagine if someone like Mayweather never held a belt, even after beating champions he was instantly stripped for refusing to pay sanctioning fees. Those holding the belts in that division would become the butt of a joke.

Dropping the interims and secondary belts would be a start

I think the big four (WBC, WBA, WBO, IBF) need to work together to make unification title fights happen more often and only one world title per division per sanctioning body. I don't care about the other minor titles. Getting rid of those is not going to happen anyway because the sanctioning bodies depend on those fees. I was at an IBF convention and one of the meetings was about how many title fights (world and other belts) they had in a year. They can have 100 and they still want more. I don't think the big four are ever going to combine into one sanctioning body. They get more money by being separate because each one has titles that are similar such as intercontinental, but they can all make more money by having mandatory unifications when possible. Of course, it would help boxing to grow in popularity instead of decline.

Mangoraj wrote: ↑13 Jul 2021, 05:09 What would be the best way to reduce the amount of belts in boxing to create a greater legitimacy for Boxing as a whole

Fans, Promoters, Networks. All need to just stop acknowledging them.

Who's #1? There's your Champion.

When everyone is a champion, nobody is a champion. Proliferation gets us closer to endgame. Lets start recognizing ibo

Jeff_lacy_ko wrote: ↑13 Jul 2021, 20:50 When everyone is a champion, nobody is a champion. Proliferation gets us closer to endgame. Lets start recognizing ibo

Yep. Not too long ago if you asked 10 people who the Heavyweight Champion was. 5 or 6 of them would've known "Mike Tyson"

Now. All 10 might probably won't know Joshua or Fury.

There are lots of champions in other sports. In tennis and golf, there are four major tournaments. There is a champion of each one. In one calendar year, it is very rare for one player to win all four. There are also the minor tournaments and there is a champion for each one of those. In boxing, there are four major sanctioning bodies. Their minor titles are like the minor tournaments in other sports in that they are at a lower level than the world titles. Boxing can have many minor champions and I don't think it hurts the sport. However, world champions in boxing should be limited in number as much as possible. If people don't know who the heavyweight champions are today, then it is because boxing is not as popular. When the Klitschko brothers were world champions at the same time, they were not going to unify and fight each other because they are brothers. They were both more popular than Fury and Joshua. That may be because boxing was more popular when they were active, but also because they were champs for many years.

I don't know about other countries but in America all it would take is the state commissions agreeing to stop recognizing the sanctioning bodies.

Example: if the NSAC withdraws recognition of the WBA that means WBA belts can no longer be contested in their jurisdiction.

If any state commission suspends a boxer the other states are supposed to recognize that suspension(lol).
It should be the same way with sanctioning bodies.
If ONE commission refuses to recognize any sanctioning body all the rest should be required to do the same.

Where do we see boxing in 20 years? It will never die as people love to fight and love to see a fist fight but I don't feel it will be generating respectable money as a sport.

lazboy wrote: ↑13 Jul 2021, 23:01 Where do we see boxing in 20 years? It will never die as people love to fight and love to see a fist fight but I don't feel it will be generating respectable money as a sport.

Objectively speaking it has slowly become less relevant every year for decades

It has been at an all time low since hbo left. Its just awful now - promoters lined up with netwroks that overpaid for boxing and created a siloed pos that is 95 percent mismatches.

Boxers like fighting on twitter and playing the risk/reward game in the ring. Until networks start massively cutting the money back down to reality we are stuck.

Change comes slowly then suddenly. Pbc is already forced to put mediocre fights on ppv since nbc wants out and showtime is all but done. Top rank has a dwindling espn warchest and dazn is a trainwreck of incompetence. They could all fall like dominos any day and be forced to work together to get their stars big money.

lazboy wrote: ↑13 Jul 2021, 23:01 Where do we see boxing in 20 years? It will never die as people love to fight and love to see a fist fight but I don't feel it will be generating respectable money as a sport.

That could happen. Boxing has always been corrupt, but the difference is now it has a strong competitor that is a combat sport which is MMA. In the past, we knew that there was corruption, but it didn't stop people from being boxing fans. Kickboxing has never been more popular than boxing, so I was not sure whether MMA could surpass boxing in popularity. It has happened though. Teddy Atlas talks about MMA on YouTube more than boxing. About 75% of his videos now are about MMA. I believe that almost all pro sports are going to suffer in the future. It is already happening now with TV viewers declining for NBA and NFL. Also, with most of these athletes and coaches getting the vax shot, we don't know what could happen in the future. The boxing with celebrities fighting or one of them fighting past his prime Floyd Mayweather is not going to help professional boxing because it is not pro boxing. It is just boxing exhibitions. I don't believe that the young people that are paying to see these fights are going to pay for PPV pro boxing. The money is going to decline for the NBA and NFL because the next TV contract will be based on less viewers. I don't watch much American football anymore and it's not because of the players kneeling for the national anthem. It is because I hate when the calls or non-calls of referees affect the outcome of the game. When boxing robbed Golovkin of victory against Alvarez, that was the last straw for me. As the money declines, the quality of athletes will also decline for any sport. Also, with more children getting autism, less people will be able to become pro athletes when they are adults. I predict esports will continue to grow and will surpass American football in money and fans. It's almost there right now. What happens to women's pro sports when transgender people dominate that? In 20 years, there will be less families because of the decline in marriage. There will be more single people playing video games and I believe most of them will not care about pro sports except for maybe MMA.

Fight fans are responsible for boxing having so many belts.

Mainstream casuals are uneducated and gullible. And often tune into bouts, simply because they have a "title" associated with them.

Even self-proclaimed die-hard boxing aficionados are partially to blame for this situation.

For instance, they dishonestly claim that Golovkin holds the record for the most middleweight title defences.

They claim he’s made 21 of them, but in reality, he has only made ten successful defences of a legitimate world title.

Interim and regular belts don't count. They don't suddenly become legitimate titles, simply because Golovkin previously held them.

We shouldn’t attempt to “legitimise” meaningless trinkets, simply because our favourite fighters choose to own them.

Our standards have to be applied consistently.

Put it this way, Trevor Bryan is either a legitimate world heavyweight champion or he isn’t.

I feel it’s definitely the latter. And so the same rule has to be applied to many of GGG's title defences.

Anyway, if the governing bodies, such as the WBA, can continue making money (via sanctioning fees), through the creation of multiple titles per weight class, then they will continue doing so.

And fight fans are responsible for this situation.

ya f@ck golovkin and his phony belts!!!

Jeff_lacy_ko wrote: ↑14 Jul 2021, 06:54

lazboy wrote: ↑13 Jul 2021, 23:01 Where do we see boxing in 20 years? It will never die as people love to fight and love to see a fist fight but I don't feel it will be generating respectable money as a sport.

Objectively speaking it has slowly become less relevant every year for decades

It has been at an all time low since hbo left. Its just awful now - promoters lined up with netwroks that overpaid for boxing and created a siloed pos that is 95 percent mismatches.

Boxers like fighting on twitter and playing the risk/reward game in the ring. Until networks start massively cutting the money back down to reality we are stuck.

Change comes slowly then suddenly. Pbc is already forced to put mediocre fights on ppv since nbc wants out and showtime is all but done. Top rank has a dwindling espn warchest and dazn is a trainwreck of incompetence. They could all fall like dominos any day and be forced to work together to get their stars big money.

I agree - what you're saying seems likely. I definitely think the sport is in a terrible state. Not sure what point it needs to get to before things tumble, maybe there are several more years of decline to come. In the meantime, the fans miss out on the fights we want to see and the sport suffers in numerous ways.

There is also an unhealthy culture in boxing at the moment. Mayweather had a big influence on the sport, I don't blame him but the risk/reward and the perfect record blueprint for success are seriously jeopardizing things. True, it worked for Mayweather but he had to toil and his journey was unique.

We need to see the top fighters challenge themselves - for their own growth within the sport at the least, but they are held back by the promise of a bigger payday down the line. I genuinely feel that this thinking is embedded in some of these fighters and is not just management advice.

I really hope Canelo has some influence moving forward, as he is the face of boxing at the moment. He's a man who has a loss yet has gone on to forge an amazing career on top of being mega successful. I'm not saying I agree with all of his decisions, especially when he was under the GB Banner, but he's really on a roll and hopefully is seen as a role model for change.

It’s the WBA that frustrate me the most. Super, Regular and Interim all at the same time is just pure greed. There is literally no need for an interim when you have an active champion yet it doesn’t stop them.

The top promoters in the world (PBC, TR, Matchroom, Golden Boy) need to get to together and say to the WBA that they will no longer make fights for those belts (WBA interim and regular) and stick to it. It doesn’t help Floyd saying there are too many belts yet then promotes Tank as 3 weight world champ when he wins a secondary belt.

Same with the franchise belt. It’s pointless and lessens the value of a proper WBC belt. Lopez
should be undisputed champ but he isn’t because of the WBC’s stupidity.

lazboy wrote: ↑14 Jul 2021, 23:51Mayweather had a big influence on the sport, I don't blame him but the risk/reward and the perfect record blueprint for success are seriously jeopardizing things. True, it worked for Mayweather but he had to toil and his journey was unique.

I don’t understand your argument about Floyd Mayweather Jr., in the context of a "Too many belts in boxing" discussion.

He never even held the WBO title (he refused to pay them sanctioning fees for the Pacquiao bout), and nor did he hold any interim or regular straps either.

And he only briefly held the IBO & IBA belts, due to the fact he inadvertently won them by beating Zab Judah (IBF champ) and Carlos Baldomir (WBC champ), because they happened to be their titleholders.

As far as I can tell, he dumped both meaningless trinkets very quickly.

Floyd captured and held belts that are currently universally proclaimed as being legitimate titles.

I understand what you’re saying about Floyd Mayweather Jr. adopting a businessman mentality to the sport of boxing, but that didn’t translate to him resorting to capturing meaningless secondary titles.

If anything, you really should be applauding Floyd for refraining from holding meaningless trinkets.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑15 Jul 2021, 09:07

lazboy wrote: ↑14 Jul 2021, 23:51Mayweather had a big influence on the sport, I don't blame him but the risk/reward and the perfect record blueprint for success are seriously jeopardizing things. True, it worked for Mayweather but he had to toil and his journey was unique.

I don’t understand your argument about Floyd Mayweather Jr., in the context of a "Too many belts in boxing" discussion.

He never even held the WBO title (he refused to pay them sanctioning fees for the Pacquiao bout), and nor did he hold any interim or regular straps either.

And he only briefly held the IBO & IBA belts, due to the fact he inadvertently won them by beating Zab Judah (IBF champ) and Carlos Baldomir (WBC champ), because they happened to be their titleholders.

As far as I can tell, he dumped both meaningless trinkets very quickly.

Floyd captured and held belts that are currently universally proclaimed as being legitimate titles.

I understand what you’re saying about Floyd Mayweather Jr. adopting a businessman mentality to the sport of boxing, but that didn’t translate to him resorting to capturing meaningless secondary titles.

If anything, you really should be applauding Floyd for refraining from holding meaningless trinkets.

I don’t think it was particularly difficult to follow that I went off on a tangent, complaining about how the sport is ruined right now.

lol, the guy who brings ggg into every f@cking thread getting after someone for raising a tangential point

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑15 Jul 2021, 18:16 lol, the guy who brings ggg into every f@cking thread getting after someone for raising a tangential point

The same fight fans that persistently moan about the WBA interim and regular titles being meaningless trinkets, then doggedly maintain GGG has legitimately performed 21 defences of his world middleweight title, which they claim to be a record.

However, if the same people actually applied their rules consistently, then GGG has only performed ten defences of his world middleweight title.

Therefore, if you claim that GGG performed 21 defences of his world middleweight title, then you're also claiming that Trevor Bryan is a legitimate world heavyweight champion.

So what's it to be? The WBA interim and regular titles are only "important" when your favourite fighter holds them, or are they ALWAYS meaningless trinkets?

Is that really so difficult to understand? Come on kid, it seems fairly straightforward to me.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑15 Jul 2021, 09:07

lazboy wrote: ↑14 Jul 2021, 23:51Mayweather had a big influence on the sport, I don't blame him but the risk/reward and the perfect record blueprint for success are seriously jeopardizing things. True, it worked for Mayweather but he had to toil and his journey was unique.

I don’t understand your argument about Floyd Mayweather Jr., in the context of a "Too many belts in boxing" discussion.

He never even held the WBO title (he refused to pay them sanctioning fees for the Pacquiao bout), and nor did he hold any interim or regular straps either.

And he only briefly held the IBO & IBA belts, due to the fact he inadvertently won them by beating Zab Judah (IBF champ) and Carlos Baldomir (WBC champ), because they happened to be their titleholders.

As far as I can tell, he dumped both meaningless trinkets very quickly.

Floyd captured and held belts that are currently universally proclaimed as being legitimate titles.

I understand what you’re saying about Floyd Mayweather Jr. adopting a businessman mentality to the sport of boxing, but that didn’t translate to him resorting to capturing meaningless secondary titles.

If anything, you really should be applauding Floyd for refraining from holding meaningless trinkets.

The issue I take with Floyd and belts isn’t from his fighting career - it’s from his promotional position.

He comes out and correctly says that there are too many world titles and it needs sorting out. Then he’s involved in the promotion of Tank/Barrios for a secondary title and then proclaims Tank to be a 3 weight world champ.

The top figures in the sport need to do more than just talk. If they stop promoting fights for these BS belts then the sanctioning bodies may be forced to change. At the moment they don’t need to.

Same with Eddie - he slagged off the WBC franchise and then requests it for the Super Flys.

lazboy wrote: ↑15 Jul 2021, 18:08

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑15 Jul 2021, 09:07

lazboy wrote: ↑14 Jul 2021, 23:51Mayweather had a big influence on the sport, I don't blame him but the risk/reward and the perfect record blueprint for success are seriously jeopardizing things. True, it worked for Mayweather but he had to toil and his journey was unique.

I don’t understand your argument about Floyd Mayweather Jr., in the context of a "Too many belts in boxing" discussion.

He never even held the WBO title (he refused to pay them sanctioning fees for the Pacquiao bout), and nor did he hold any interim or regular straps either.

And he only briefly held the IBO & IBA belts, due to the fact he inadvertently won them by beating Zab Judah (IBF champ) and Carlos Baldomir (WBC champ), because they happened to be their titleholders.

As far as I can tell, he dumped both meaningless trinkets very quickly.

Floyd captured and held belts that are currently universally proclaimed as being legitimate titles.

I understand what you’re saying about Floyd Mayweather Jr. adopting a businessman mentality to the sport of boxing, but that didn’t translate to him resorting to capturing meaningless secondary titles.

If anything, you really should be applauding Floyd for refraining from holding meaningless trinkets.

I don’t think it was particularly difficult to follow that I went off on a tangent, complaining about how the sport is ruined right now.

If you find a concept too difficult to explain, then you can't seriously expect others to understand it.

As a general rule, Floyd Mayweather only held the IBF, WBC and WBA titles. He didn't even acknowledge the WBO, IBO, IBA, WBA interim, WBA regular titles etc.

He's also gone on record numerous times complaining about there being far too many titles in boxing.

Therefore, why mention his name in the context of there being "too many titles in boxing"? He's not responsible for this situation. In fact he's against it.

For sure, you can blame Floyd Mayweather Jr's bad influence for many things, but definitely he's not responsible for there being "too many titles in boxing".

What you're doing is synonymous to blaming "a thief for obesity!" Two bad things that are completely unrelated!