Originally Posted by lufcrazy
if noone can be ranked over a claimant that's as good a champion as any.
It's not that I accept it, it's more that it's just how boxing is today. A title has to have prestige to be worth a damn and unfortunately today no one title is as prestigious as the other and we have regressed to a multi claimant system ruled by the man and not the belt. A TRUE champion system has to be prestigious and universal otherwise it serves no purpose.
Your system is idealistic but not objective because of it's history. What was good enough for a champ of yesteryear isn't good enough today. Calling wlad a contender is totally out of context with the reality of his status. Placing his claim below Briggs is even crazier still imo.
Would boxing be better in a 1 belt universe? Of course. It's just not the reality of today.
"Realities" change with reform, my friend, and reform begins with clarity. Stay tuned.