Well I'd like to see champions fight 2-4 times a year. If you are on the low side of this then I think both should be against the top 1-3 guys in your division. If you are on the high side then I don't have a problem with a fighter take 1-2 lesser opponents. If we only had one belt and one governing body this would more often be the case. If you had one governing body I'm sure they would tell champ they had to fight the number one contender at least once a year. This would force promoters/managers to meet a time line or risk being stripped. You could even take one step further and dictate the payout percentages of champ versus challenger. This would take a lot of the haggling over who makes how much out of the equation. As it is we have to depend on a fighter to want to fight multiple times a year, fight top competition and for the Alphabets/Promoters to not get in the way. I've never understood why the US congress hasn't created a federal boxing commision that only recognizes one belt. The Alphabets would be out of a job in a heartbeat and the sport would be in much better shape