Should we only have one boxing organisation?

[dickilad90]

I always get a bit p*ssed off, seeing all these different versions of the titles (IBF, WBC, WBO, WBU etc...) i could go on!

Surely it would be better to have just one version of the title so the champion of each weight is truely the only champion of that weight, just like the old days?

[Bx730NY]

There should definitely be just one. That way, all this mess can get cleaned up.

[dickilad90]

der aint no room for a dominant champ at the moment and any attempt to become one will be hampered by unification bouts etc...

[SimonH]

The boxing organizations can make some fighters a lot more richer. What I think you need is a boxers union, in each country, that can be members of a worldwide associate union, which could sponsor a world Champion amongst its members, that would be considered above any other organization. But the other organizations could continue their titles, that do attract extra money for fighters, particularly when on TV.

[dickilad90]

never fought of that but i like that idea

suppose variations of the title makes it easier for fighters to achieve top ten status sooner

[B@rr3r@]

3 Belts

It gives the fighters more chance to make a name, earn money, fulfill there dream.

It gives us more superfights and more great fights.

As long as it was done properly and all belts were valid and controlled properly, I think 3 would b fine.

Its nice to see a Superfight with belts on the line. Especially if both Fighter has one each.

[means2184]

having fewer important belts is what made certain fighters of the past not be able to fight for a chapionship cause it took to long ....when used properly we have a good system ....find 4 champs and make the fight eachother <---not a bad system really

[bigragu]

I always get a bit p*ssed off, seeing all these different versions of the titles (IBF, WBC, WBO, WBU etc...) i could go on!

Surely it would be better to have just one version of the title so the champion of each weight is truely the only champion of that weight, just like the old days?

I thought it was best when you had the WBC and the WBA, you could have title unification matches. The NABF title holder was ranked #1 contender and then you had the USBA Champ, European Champ and all was fine. Get the NABF Title and you got your shot. Then Came a man called "King" and the title he made up The IBF. it all went down from there.

[Purist]

The way things are, it would be more difficult and too full of politics then it already is, it wouldn't make things easier NOW a days.

[mokele]

Personally I think that corruption is an even bigger problem than having a bunch of world boxing organizations. Secret arrangements between world boxing organizations and promoters to rank some guys highly while ignoring other fighters is clearly undesirable but appears to be commonplace. Maybe there's nothing we can do about it. Here's an example:

WBO heavyweight rankings:
Champion: SERGEI LIAKHOVICH BEL
1. Wladimir Klitschko UKR
2. Luan Krasniqi GER
3. Sultan Ibragimov (Asia-Pacific) RUS
4. Ruslan Chagaev (Int-Cont) UZB
5. James Toney USA
6. Shannon Briggs (NABO) USA
7. Lamon Brewster USA
8. Samuel Peter NIG
9. Calvin Brock USA
10. Danny Williams GB
11. Alexander Dimitrenko UKR
12. Tony Thompson USA
13. Matt Skelton GB
14. David Tua SAM
15. Miguel Mollo (Latino) ITA

IBF heavyweight rankings: (taken before the recent Byrd-Wladdy fight)
CHAMPION : Chris Byrd United States
1 Vladimir Klitschko Ukraine
2 Ray Austin United States
3 Calvin Brock United States
4 Samuel Peter USBA CHAMPION United States
5 Sultan Ibragimov United States
6 John Ruiz United States
7 DaVarryl Williamson United States
8 Luan Krasniqui Germany
9 Monte Barrett United States
10 Shannon Briggs United States
11 Paolo Vidoz IBF I/C CHAMPION Italy
12 Ruslan Chagaev Uzbekistan
13 Danny Williams England
14 Kevin McBride United States
15 Eddie Chambers United States


Notice that Ray Austin isn't in the top 15 of the WBO list but #2 challenger for the IBF. Notice that James Toney is #5 challenger for the WBO while not among the top 15 for the IBF. Notice also that the IBF rankings have a preponderance of fighters from the United States (11 of the top 15 challengers) whereas the WBO does not.

This is just a drop in the bucket. It's obvious to anyone who takes a cursory look at these rankings that politics must have a lot to do with where a guy is ranked. Politics and corruption often go hand in hand. 'Nuff said!

[Taeth]

I think they keep all the sanctioning groups, but have an actual world title aside from all these groups.