Which one would make a more positive difference to boxing?

[powerpuncher]

It seems the overwhelming majority of us prefer having one title per weight class, and are less overwhelmingly in favor of less weight classes.

All of which deserves more scrutiny (weight classes). Right now the differences are 3-4 pounds at the lighter weights, and 7-8 pounds at the heavier weights. That's probably slicing the cheese too thin.

Although being familiar with the original weight classes, I looked them up anyway and was surprised to find there were lower limits on the weights.

For instance, welter is stated at 140-147, and middle is stated at 154-160. I imagine if you were a 150-pounder and couldn't make welter comfortably, you'd have been forced to fight at middle, which would present considerable disadvantages.

I also imagine if the 150-pounder showed up on fight night weighing below 154, he'd still be able to fight at his risk, knowing the opponent could have weighed in at 160.

I only mention it because it's odd seeing windows on weight classes, when in my mind it's only the upper limit that matters. Odd that they would present it that way.

But back in the days of the original weight classes, the differences from flyweight to light heavyweight were, in ascending order: 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, and 15 pounds.

It's obvious then, that at lighter weights it's necessary to have a smaller margin between divisions.

But it makes me wonder what the optimum divisions would be. Seventeen (17) weight divisions DOES sound like a lot when you ponder the actual number. But..... are eight divisions enough to satisfy our cravings for more boxing and more championship fights?

Also..... I could see catchweights being more logical back in the days of eight divisions. The case of the 150-pounder fits that picture pretty well.

But thinking now about the 17 divisions...... why in HELL do we need to keep slicing the pie into even smaller pieces?? Might as well have divisions at each 1-pound increment.

TBH, I think with the comparatively tiny increments we have now, catchweights should be done away with, at least for any type of "championship" fight.

UFC does 8 weight classes and most people don’t seem to be calling for more. I have heard about maybe trying to put in one more, but Dana White says that he doesn’t want to. But those in between weights are an easy fix. If you weigh 150, you can easily cut down to 147. If you weight more and can’t cut, you can easily bulk up just a bit. With the original 8 weight classes, it wouldn’t be hard to go one way or another.

But that was my big thing. Where do the weight classes stop? 17 just seems very excessive. I don’t think any other combat sport has so many weigtt he classes. I know that college and international wrestling have 10 while the olympics goes down to six (which I don’t think is enough).

[ykdadamaja]

WE all know why we have multiple sanctioning bodies, because when we had one in just the WBA, it became corrupt and legit guys were not getting a title shot or be recognized for the money.

[Kirkland Laing]

If you could couple the one title per weight division thing with the champ having to fight a mandatory every couple of fights and the mandatory being the guy at the top of the consensus top ten then boxing would become much bigger than it is now. The promoters would hate it though.

[powerpuncher]

If you could couple the one title per weight division thing with the champ having to fight a mandatory every couple of fights and the mandatory being the guy at the top of the consensus top ten then boxing would become much bigger than it is now. The promoters would hate it though.

I always thought that it would be cool if somehow they could have a fan vote. Like every third title defense is a fan vote and they have to fight who the fans vote in. Although I understand the logistical nightmare it would be with negotiations and everything. It’s just a cool thought.

[Alpha]

If you could couple the one title per weight division thing with the champ having to fight a mandatory every couple of fights and the mandatory being the guy at the top of the consensus top ten then boxing would become much bigger than it is now. The promoters would hate it though.

If it ever went back to 1 Championship, it would need to be run properly or things wouldn't be much better than they are today. High risk/ low reward challengers would be avoided for as long as possible for higher paying/ lower risk opponents. The rankings would also need to be monitored, so undeserving fighters were not pushed unfairly towards the top.

As fans we can make a start by not recognising these sanctioning bodies and their worthless belts (fighters need to wake up as well).

My thinking is fighters should be fighting 3 times a year to maintain their top 10 ranking and only fighters in the top 10 should be getting title shots.

What we need is a decent ranking system that the majority of fans can agree with, maybe along the lines of powerpunchers idea of fan voting between 3 opponents to get a shot at the title.

[Dia bando]

Four main governing body's so four Champions at each weight in some cases.
Then the TV PPV giants who will not let there cash cows fight on someone else's network.
We rarely get Champion V Champion theses days unlike in the 80s when it was a common.
It's all about money not the belts theses days there again boxing is a business pure and simple.

[TitoFan]

Four main governing body's so four Champions at each weight in some cases.

If that was all it was, Dia...... But to make matter worse, some of these governing bodies have more than one belt per weight class! So the titles just keep on multiplying until anyone who wants a belt can practically have one.

Then the WBC comes up with this Franchise Champion bullshit, and makes things even worse than they EVER were.

It's enough to make fans

[X]

Good question, I would go for the one champ per existing weight divisions. When there were only eight, there were some people who fell between the cracks of those old weights.

i would also go for a weigh in on the way to the ring, stopping the silly games people,play with their weight. Admittedly, there would have to be a hydration % the fighters would have to reach.

[Fenster]

If you could couple the one title per weight division thing with the champ having to fight a mandatory every couple of fights and the mandatory being the guy at the top of the consensus top ten then boxing would become much bigger than it is now. The promoters would hate it though.

The fighters would hate it more than promoters.

The best thing for boxing fans in America would be if Dana White took over. It's incredible the "small" purses his fighters get (officially) compared with boxers in America considering their success.

[TIC]

i thought pbc no longer recgonising the wbo would be a good thing, turns out things will more than likely get worse. they want to introduce their own belt. more inhouse pandering on the way

[Kirkland Laing]

If you could couple the one title per weight division thing with the champ having to fight a mandatory every couple of fights and the mandatory being the guy at the top of the consensus top ten then boxing would become much bigger than it is now. The promoters would hate it though.

The fighters would hate it more than promoters.

The best thing for boxing fans in America would be if Dana White took over. It's incredible the "small" purses his fighters get (officially) compared with boxers in America considering their success.

If you had one guy or one organisation running all the chamionship fights then that would be ideal. The best thing about UFC is that you know the top guys are going to be matched against each other. They can't avoid it because they're all signed to the same guy who doesn't care who wins and who loses because he's backed both horses. The champ keeps winning and he becomes a legend and more than likely does good and increasing PPV numbers. Somebody beats him and he's an overnight sensation and immediately becomes a big name. This is what boxing is missing.

[powerpuncher]

If you could couple the one title per weight division thing with the champ having to fight a mandatory every couple of fights and the mandatory being the guy at the top of the consensus top ten then boxing would become much bigger than it is now. The promoters would hate it though.

The fighters would hate it more than promoters.

The best thing for boxing fans in America would be if Dana White took over. It's incredible the "small" purses his fighters get (officially) compared with boxers in America considering their success.

If you had one guy or one organisation running all the chamionship fights then that would be ideal. The best thing about UFC is that you know the top guys are going to be matched against each other. They can't avoid it because they're all signed to the same guy who doesn't care who wins and who loses because he's backed both horses. The champ keeps winning and he becomes a legend and more than likely does good and increasing PPV numbers. Somebody beats him and he's an overnight sensation and immediately becomes a big name. This is what boxing is missing.

That’s why I hope that one of the streaming sites/networks takes over and just becomes what UFC is to MMA. Then other promotions can be like Belator or ONE and still put on good fights but everyone knows where the best fighters go.