Which is more important lineal title or alphabet soup (WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO) title?

[erics44]

having more than one world title isnt bad for the sport as long as people recognise that you arent world champ if you dont hold one of these 4

perhaps 4 is too many, 3 would be fine

having more world titles gives more boxers the chance to make money, when you consider the amount of money people make in other sports in comparision and you also compare the hard slog training and all that

The ring magazine belts are daft, probably one of the stoopidest introduction to the sport, the sooner it disapears the better, it just gives boxing fans something else to moan about

[Master]

WBC is the oldest title? so that one from the alphabet boys.

[Lance Uppercut]

WBC is the oldest title? so that one from the alphabet boys.

The WBA is the oldest. They started in the 20's as the NBA (National Boxing Association), then changed to the WBA in the 60s.

WBC gained prominence in the 60's when the WBA inexplicably stripped Ali, and the WBC continued to recognized him as champ.

The IBF gained prominence in the 80's when the WBC inexplicably stripped Holmes, and the IBF continued to recognized him as champ.

[Lance Uppercut]

I am a fan of the Ring Magazine Championship. I can't think of a single instance where the Ring Champion is not also the #1 man in the division.

Wlad
Pascal
Martinez
Marquez
Segura
Wonjongkam


No alphabet gang can match that quality. And there is not stripping, the above fighters have to loose their belts in the Ring.