BoxRec

ive seen at least a few posters give a fighter more credit for having, say, the wbc title as opposed to other world titles, because somehow its the 'best' or most presitigious belt

similarly, some people rrfefuse to give the wbo much credit, even when their champs and challengers are often better than those of other major organizations

compare liam paro going into the lions den to beat subriel matias recently, vs canelo winning a vacant wbc vs matt hatton in a catchweight, or stiverne winning vacant wbc vs blobby arreola

do you care of what titles a fighter has, independent of who they beat to get / keep them?

Couldn't give a shit.

It only matters who they win it off and who they've defended against. The brand of the belt doesn't matter.

I only recognise WBF and WBU

as long as it's not Gucci I'm ok

SeanBrennan wrote: ↑23 Jun 2024, 16:26 as long as it's not Gucci I'm ok

you were upping wilder on the strength of him having the wbc specifically though

curious why the type of belt means anything, outside who was beaten to get it. we've had several posters and seen it around at other places wehre people plus /minus a belt simply based on what its letter are

What matters is the level of opposition you're beating. The Champion that's beating the best competition is generally regarded as the man to beat regardless of what belt he happens to be holding.

For instance even when Golovkin was just the WBA Middleweight titleholder, everyone was pretty sure he'd beat the other titleholders, and he eventually did.

I couldn't care less about the belt. It's the match-up that matters.

I do if someone is trying to pretend that a belt outside the main 4 (WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO) really is a world title. So watching British boxing in the early 2000s was a bit irritating for me...

Nope. Most divisions have one real "champion" based on who they beat to win their title and who they defend against. The others are just alphabet belt-holders as far as I am concerned, especially belt-holders who beat cupcakes in set-up fights for vacant titles. (see: Lara)

How many clear world champions are there? currently?

Heavyweight: Usyk (if you hold any other belt, it's meaningless)

Light Heavyweight: Beterbiev

Super Middleweight: Canelo

Junior Middleweight: Jermell Charlo

Welterweight: Crawford

Junior Welterweight: Teo Lopez

Junior Featherweight: Naoya Inoue

Junior Bantamweight: Estrada

Junior Flyweight: Teraji

These guys have either beaten the previous #1 or cleaned up the division by collecting belts.

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 08:59 How many clear world champions are there? currently?

Heavyweight: Usyk (if you hold any other belt, it's meaningless)

Light Heavyweight: Beterbiev

Super Middleweight: Canelo

Junior Middleweight: Jermell Charlo

Welterweight: Crawford

Junior Welterweight: Teo Lopez

Junior Featherweight: Naoya Inoue

Junior Bantamweight: Estrada

Junior Flyweight: Teraji

These guys have either beaten the previous #1 or cleaned up the division by collecting belts.

I hear what you're saying but hard to say that about Charlo since he hasn't fought at that weight for more than two years. I would have also said Bam Rodriguez at flyweight but now he's fighting Estrada, and Ioka may have two belts by next month at super fly

olij999 wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 06:58 I do if someone is trying to pretend that a belt outside the main 4 (WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO) really is a world title. So watching British boxing in the early 2000s was a bit irritating for me...

ibo pesky about that

giacomino wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 11:30

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 08:59 How many clear world champions are there? currently?

Heavyweight: Usyk (if you hold any other belt, it's meaningless)

Light Heavyweight: Beterbiev

Super Middleweight: Canelo

Junior Middleweight: Jermell Charlo

Welterweight: Crawford

Junior Welterweight: Teo Lopez

Junior Featherweight: Naoya Inoue

Junior Bantamweight: Estrada

Junior Flyweight: Teraji

These guys have either beaten the previous #1 or cleaned up the division by collecting belts.

I hear what you're saying but hard to say that about Charlo since he hasn't fought at that weight for more than two years. I would have also said Bam Rodriguez at flyweight but now he's fighting Estrada, and Ioka may have two belts by next month at super fly

Yh Charlo still not beaten, but his activity is killing him. There’s no clear #1 at 154.

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 11:41

olij999 wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 06:58 I do if someone is trying to pretend that a belt outside the main 4 (WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO) really is a world title. So watching British boxing in the early 2000s was a bit irritating for me...

ibo pesky about that

Not to mention WBU, WBF, et al.

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑23 Jun 2024, 13:39 Couldn't give a shit.

This.

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑23 Jun 2024, 21:03

SeanBrennan wrote: ↑23 Jun 2024, 16:26 as long as it's not Gucci I'm ok

you were upping wilder on the strength of him having the wbc specifically though

curious why the type of belt means anything, outside who was beaten to get it. we've had several posters and seen it around at other places wehre people plus /minus a belt simply based on what its letter are

the WBC is a prestigious belt regardless of its lunacy.

what makes it the best belt

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 17:31 what makes it the best belt

Of course it merely a perspective and opinion, but it is the most recognised and respect imo, over 60 years old. Also had the courage to switch 15 rounders to 12 first.

I am aware none of the bodies cover themselves in too much glory these days.

the wba was the first of the 'big four'

SeanBrennan wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 17:45

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 17:31 what makes it the best belt

Of course it merely a perspective and opinion, but it is the most recognised and respect imo, over 60 years old. Also had the courage to switch 15 rounders to 12 first.

I am aware none of the bodies cover themselves in too much glory these days.

Have they ever Sean?

Concerning the original question, No, I couldn't care less.

In fact, I couldn't tell you who has what belt.

It's irrelevant to me though I appreciate they have a dollar value for the holder.

I don't really care, a 50/50 fight is the best regardless of what the rewards are.
But from a boxer's point of view, belts are a series of career achievements.
Even if not at world level, an area or country title is nice to show the grand kids once you explain it wasn't just for participation

Giancarlo wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 18:08

SeanBrennan wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 17:45

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 17:31 what makes it the best belt

Of course it merely a perspective and opinion, but it is the most recognised and respect imo, over 60 years old. Also had the courage to switch 15 rounders to 12 first.

I am aware none of the bodies cover themselves in too much glory these days.

Have they ever Sean?

Hi mate - great to hear from you. The answer is probably never ever buddy, I know that.

SeanBrennan wrote: ↑25 Jun 2024, 17:33

Giancarlo wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 18:08

SeanBrennan wrote: ↑24 Jun 2024, 17:45

Of course it merely a perspective and opinion, but it is the most recognised and respect imo, over 60 years old. Also had the courage to switch 15 rounders to 12 first.

I am aware none of the bodies cover themselves in too much glory these days.

Have they ever Sean?

Hi mate - great to hear from you. The answer is probably never ever buddy, I know that.

Sean, did you get that book The Sweet Science?