Should the Alphabet titles rank other organisations champions

I believe that boxing would benefit fromhaving recognised champions in each weight class. At this moment in time you can have anything up to 4 weight classes and don't get me started on the interim's or the WBC Champion Emetrius or what ever it is called. Therefore i think it is time that the boxing organisations recognised other organisations champions in their rankings. You could therefore have the WBO making Mikkel Kessler Joe Calzaghe's mandatory. I think this would help some of the titles be brought together and help create recognised champs. It would bring the matchup's that the fans deserve instead of us missing out due to TV, promoters and to an extent boxing politics.

The problem is, if the titles were syncronised, there would be no recognition of the smaller ones. They would lose their identity so to speak. This is not a bad thing IMO, but if you are running a sanctioning body, it is in your interests to have your title stand out. If a fighter such as Cotto was to hold the WBC plus some alphabet title, the WBC would be the belt being fought for, the smaller one is just passed on by default. It is better for the alphabet body to have a champion of their own. It retains their identity.

what needs to happen is a federal commission that only recognizes one belt, preferably the Rings and put all of these blood sucking pariahs out of busniess

Never gonna happen because the corrupt governing bodies dont want unifications. If they actually wanted one champ per weight it could all be done it about a year but theres absolutely no chance that it will. The only hope is that somewhere down the line of of the bigger organisations (say the WBC) starts buying out the smaller ones and combining the titles into one. Still, dont hold your breath.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bukom Battler

I believe that boxing would benefit fromhaving recognised champions in each weight class. At this moment in time you can have anything up to 4 weight classes and don't get me started on the interim's or the WBC Champion Emetrius or what ever it is called. Therefore i think it is time that the boxing organisations recognised other organisations champions in their rankings. You could therefore have the WBO making Mikkel Kessler Joe Calzaghe's mandatory. I think this would help some of the titles be brought together and help create recognised champs. It would bring the matchup's that the fans deserve instead of us missing out due to TV, promoters and to an extent boxing politics.

---

:coolclick: #4 man. The same thought had crossed my mind before. This will give titles more meaning and will encourage people to fight the mandator as it will make you the most money and be the best fight. People want to see who the best is in each division and the governing bodies are making it difficult...this is just one of the reasons why the casual fan is turning off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VanChilds

what needs to happen is a federal commission that only recognizes one belt, preferably the Rings and put all of these blood sucking pariahs out of busniess

---

i have one major problem with the belt and thats the fact that it allows its belt to be determined between nr 1 and 3.. a good example was the calzaghe vs lacy fight, joe the nr 1 , and lacy nr 3.. it the ring belt is available, it should only be determined by nr 1 and 2.. every other world championship is a manner of nr 1 and 2 determing who is the best..

and what if the scenario of calzaghe and ottke replays itself (sure calzaghe was better).. but the ring belt kept changing from one to the other, as i recall..

but what would determine, who is holding the belt.. then it would be down to, who has fought who, which fight was most impressive and in the end, there would be to much controversy involved..

i really agree with those stating, that the should rank other titleists, i find it close to stupid, that they dont..

it could easely be done, wbc, wba, ibf and i would also maybe include wbo..

, so in every way it would be to benefit the sport(mandatorys with unifications fights) and also separating the real top fighters from the hyped ones.. logics would say, there was 4 champions, thereby they would leave only 6 other places in the top 10, not ranking them would leave 9 places in the top 10.. we would see more equal matchups, bigger fights as the contenders and champions would have to step up ..

Well think about this...If I was the established champ in a weight class I would only keep one belt. First I woudn't want to fight three orgs mandatorys and pay three orgs sanctioning fees....