What's a Title worth.

[Dia bando]

It seems to me people have there view on titles and belts, and there worth weather WBC WBA IBF
or WBO. With so many governing body's you can see why boxing is in a bit of a mess.
What has coursed this mess PPV the demand for fights on TV , greedy governing body I just wonder
what people think interesting to hear your views.

[Dropanuke]

IMO the WBC and WBA are the true world titles, maybe the ibf but that belt carries a lot more question marks due to controversy!!!
The ring belt is ok but in my eyes if you hold WBA and WBC then u r the man

[Dia bando]

IMO the WBC and WBA are the true world titles, maybe the ibf but that belt carries a lot more question marks due to controversy!!!
The ring belt is ok but in my eyes if you hold WBA and WBC then u r the man

I agree WBC and WBA are true titles, but Pac man has been a WBO champion so what worth
are these bits of plastic, lets face it the Lonsdale belt is the nicest of the lot.
Would you call Chavez Jr the man WBC champiom may be hardly the best middle weight in the world.

[roberto duran legend]

Belts of any kind have been so devalued now its beyond a joke , diamond and silver, WTF ,
pointless, meaning less crap, IMO if the best fighters fight the best fighters , that is proof
enough who is best .

[Mars_ax]

It seems to me people have there view on titles and belts, and there worth weather WBC WBA IBF
or WBO. With so many governing body's you can see why boxing is in a bit of a mess.
What has coursed this mess PPV the demand for fights on TV , greedy governing body I just wonder
what people think interesting to hear your views.

We could probably do with a few less titles, but i'm certainly not against having so many. It gives more pugs a chance to own a strap, and generally speaking titles translate into making more money for more fighters. Also, as fans we get to see more "title" fights.

P.S. There's usually a universally recognized champ in each division, so it tends to work out.

[armyash]

It was bad enough having different belts but now they have diamond, silver, super champ, emeritus, etc I now actually don't care what title is on the line. I can see how the fighters still care because a title will give them bragging rights and reason to claim to be the best.

I don't need there to be a belt on the line to know whether or not it's a meaningful world level fight. If a fight was made between Martinez and Chavez jr would a title make a difference? Not to me, the winner would be the daddy regardless of who has the belts elsewhere in the division, but those with the belts have something to bargain with.

I believe this thread has been started as a result of the other thread discussing Cleverly and the WBO title which is fair enough. I don't mind the WBO as it happens, ok they seem to sanction some shitty fights and allow obscure fighters to fight for their title but at least they are not constantly making headlines due to corruption. They are not clean cut but I'm sick to death of reading and hearing about Sulaimans shady dealings and dubious decision making with the WBC.

As it is the WBO have rejected Robin Krasniqi, which at least shows they have some standards, even though Calzaghe was permitted to fight some no hopers. (not that it mattered, JC was the man title or not, especially towards the end of his career) The title is good for Cleverly especially when marketing himself and aiming for a shot at the big guys but no one considers him the best in the division. Like Haye holding the WBA title it put him in a position to bargain with the Klitschkos, the WBO can do the same for Cleverly further down the line.

Pacman, Naz, Barrera, Freitas and many other elite fighters have brought credibility to the WBO over the years so for me the fighter makes the title without a doubt.

The Froch v Bute fight is not for the #1 spot, that belongs to Ward, obviously, but the winner of their match has the right to demand a crack at Ward so between them it doesn't matter who holds what title Ward is the man as he has beaten everyone bar Bute.

I'm just waffling on now but basically my thoughts are the fighter makes the title, if you hold a title but refuse to the other top boys you can fuck off if you think I'll consider you the best. In the case of JCC jr, he should have left the title for a bit longer and continued to face the guys he has and I reckon people would lay off him and be starting to consider him a legit contender but there's money to be made and we can't have Sulaiman running out of silk pj's now can we.

Now when it comes to Area, British and Euro fights they hold credibility they won't always mean much to people outside of Europe, understandable your titles mean nothing to us either - not a slur - purely geographical significance they are good titles that allow fighters to build confidence on the way up and how they perform at these levels can be an indication of how much further they can go. I reckon every British fighter upon turning pro wants that Lonsdale belt.

I have mates who try and discuss boxing with me and it pisses me off when they start saying "yeah but fighter A holds the WBC title so he's obviousy the best blah blah blah" but to be honest it shows that the titles are a marketing tool now and nothing much else to real fans but for casual fans, they will tune in because they think they are watching the best of the best just because a title is on the line.

I know fighters always want a title, it puts them in the record books and and will look great 100 years down the line, can't knock that. If I was a pro fighter I'd want one too. (not hypocritical 1 bit am I)

[Dropanuke]

PAC even had the ibo but for example I think at welter may weather is the man and even more so having WBC and that should be the focus of a floyd vs PAC fight, not the fighters!!!
Chavez jr is jammy and should think himself lucky cos that someone like Martinez or Alvarez doesn't go for him. The belt nowadays is a tool to promote because the previous generations that held them before

[Andre]

IMO the WBC and WBA are the true world titles, maybe the ibf but that belt carries a lot more question marks due to controversy!!!
The ring belt is ok but in my eyes if you hold WBA and WBC then u r the man

Whos the IMO? Are they like IBO?

[shza]

The Ring titles are the only ones I pay any attention to, since fighters are required to win them in the ring and aren't stripped of them without losing, retiring, or abandoning the weight division. Except in the case of vacancies due to champions' retirements or weight moves, it's essentially the lineal championship. Be the man = beat the man.

[Dia bando]

I can see people have different views on this post, very interesting answers.

[Dropanuke]

IMO = In My Opinion!
Dipstick

[killersheep]

Belts of any kind have been so devalued now its beyond a joke , diamond and silver, WTF ,
pointless, meaning less crap, IMO if the best fighters fight the best fighters , that is proof
enough who is best .

I agree the belts are meaningless, but to boxers they are bargaining chips to make more money. Even minor titles can carry a higher purse than a fight for no title. Aside from the Ring title which doesn't actually sanction fights the big four IBF, WBO, WBC and WBA all operate on a system that rewards selling tickets rather than merits earned in the ring.

[Dia bando]

It seems to me people have there view on titles and belts, and there worth weather WBC WBA IBF
or WBO. With so many governing body's you can see why boxing is in a bit of a mess.
What has coursed this mess PPV the demand for fights on TV , greedy governing body I just wonder
what people think interesting to hear your views.

We could probably do with a few less titles, but i'm certainly not against having so many. It gives more pugs a chance to own a strap, and generally speaking titles translate into making more money for more fighters. Also, as fans we get to see more "title" fights.

P.S. There's usually a universally recognized champ in each division, so it tends to work out.

I agree with you to gives pugs a chance to make money, we seem to forget boxing is a more than a sport and money is a big part of it, weather we like it or not. The general public like title fights and I
think they are no were near bothered about the quality of the title as a boxing fan.
We may be hard core boxing fan's,and TV PPV give the public what they want title fights boxing needs
TV it get's people interested whom may in turn become fan's. Are the WBO or IBF doing damage with there paper titles,to the fan's may be to the general public I don't think they are bothered one bit.
Pros and cons my friends.

[Andre]

IMO = In My Opinion!
Dipstick

I was joking, call me that again see what happens.

I hate having to explain anything, but most people would realize that you can read this two ways..


IMO the WBC and WBA are the true world titles.

Also when someone puts a grin smiley on the end of a post it also means they are joking.

[Dropanuke]

IMO = In My Opinion!
Dipstick

I was joking, call me that again see what happens.

I hate having to explain anything, but most people would realize that you can read this two ways..


IMO the WBC and WBA are the true world titles.

Also when someone puts a grin smiley on the end of a post it also means they are joking.

Im being a Plonker Andre Im sorry mate I was too thick to get the joke, now im trying to cover my tracks but I got nowhere to go cause Im a touch thick and never get jokes so I go on the attack for no reason.