BoxRec

Who controles the commonwealf title. I have noticed some fighters use it to make realy worth while fights (Froch Adamu, Woolnagh) but sometimes all kinds of crap gets put up as a commenewalth bout.

Also I belive the Harrison Williams fight is now a commonwealth fight. Do they have rankings or manditory opponents or what?

Anyone know.

josh fg wrote:Who controles the commonwealf title. I have noticed some fighters use it to make realy worth while fights (Froch Adamu, Woolnagh) but sometimes all kinds of crap gets put up as a commenewalth bout.

Also I belive the Harrison Williams fight is now a commonwealth fight. Do they have rankings or manditory opponents or what?

Anyone know.

Its not as good as it used to be. I think "Money" controls it. As long as theres money for the fight and the fighters are there, thats what controls the commonwealth title these days.

Big fight Harrison Williams, money!

Who designates that fight or this fight significant though

josh fg wrote:Who designates that fight or this fight significant though

A big fight like that, looks nice as a Commonwealth title fight. I think the fact that the title was open and this fight was in place was good timing. If there is a system, which I'd be surprised if it was inforced for holders, then I think these two are worthy of it.

I'd hold the British title in higher regard, even though in geography terms, the Commonwealth would claim more countries.

The Hawk wrote:

josh fg wrote:Who designates that fight or this fight significant though

A big fight like that, looks nice as a Commonwealth title fight. I think the fact that the title was open and this fight was in place was good timing. If there is a system, which I'd be surprised if it was inforced for holders, then I think these two are worthy of it.

I'd hold the British title in higher regard, even though in geography terms, the Commonwealth would claim more countries.

I feel the same about the British as opposed to the commonwealf although the commanwealth can be used to make good fights. It is a shame though it would be good if it was used as a contest between the best national champions or something similar to the European belt then it really would be something. Now it is almost always British fighters who hold it.

josh fg wrote:

The Hawk wrote:

josh fg wrote:Who designates that fight or this fight significant though

A big fight like that, looks nice as a Commonwealth title fight. I think the fact that the title was open and this fight was in place was good timing. If there is a system, which I'd be surprised if it was inforced for holders, then I think these two are worthy of it.

I'd hold the British title in higher regard, even though in geography terms, the Commonwealth would claim more countries.

I feel the same about the British as opposed to the commonwealf although the commanwealth can be used to make good fights. It is a shame though it would be good if it was used as a contest between the best national champions or something similar to the European belt then it really would be something. Now it is almost always British fighters who hold it.

Yes thats true, it would be good used proper between the national champions as you said of Commonwealth Countries, then it would mean more I'd think.

The British Champions to me seem to be much better mostly than national champions within the commonwealth countrys. I think we have a stronger domestic level of Boxing.

It would be good for say the national champion of the UK, as in a British Champion meeting the Australian Champion and so on in a Box off that way. I think the chances of it being used like that now is gone.

As long as the fights are made that we want to see, I don't think a belt matters much. Harrison Williams for example being for the Commonwealth does not add any more flavor.

Most titles today are paper titles. Only a few belts mean something and half the time they're stripped from another fighter for refusing to fight a shitbag opponent by taking a fight vs a better fighter (Taylor Hopkins for example)

Mattyp151 wrote:Most titles today are paper titles. Only a few belts mean something and half the time they're stripped from another fighter for refusing to fight a shitbag opponent by taking a fight vs a better fighter (Taylor Hopkins for example)

EBU means something as the holder is the best non world champ in europe and has to prove it.

In terms or the world titles WBC can be okay although is corrupt, IBF not bad IBO straight up good title not corrupt but promoters don't like it, WBA getting to be a joke since they invented superchamps

Belts get stripped, taken away, whatevered way too often to mean anything. Champs move up while they have the belt, leaving it back in another weightclass. Then 1 deserving fighter and 1 often possibly deserving fighter fight for it and still aren't treated as a true champ. No belts in boxing have any real menaing....Look at Ruiz. He has lost his belt twice and some how still has it.