Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > General Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-18-2012, 03:48 PM   #16
bailey
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: England
Posts: 13,367
vCash: 75
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SJS19 View Post
Right now in Boxing, the fighter makes the belt. Not the other way around.

Sad, but true.
Correct. Its the boxer.

Alot of belts that had credit and history, have now come up with other ideas like WBC Silver, WBC champ Emeritus, WBC Diamond and WBA Super champ, regular champ etc
bailey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 06-18-2012, 04:13 PM   #17
ajillusions
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 167
vCash: 676
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montero View Post
Right now this is the ranking in terms of best to worst sanctioning bodies:

1. IBF
2. WBO
3. WBC
4. WBA

The WBA is historically the oldest santioning body and it's a shame that's it's become the worst of the major four groups. Honestly, even tough the IBO is considered a minor title, I probably put them above the WBA at this point - they are absolutely disgusting. They have numerous titlists in several divisions. Pathetic.
I'd go along with this. May swap WBC and WBA around. I like the reweigh that the IBF enforce. The IBO even has some decent champions, Wladimir at heavyweight, Oosthuizen at super middle, Golovkin at middle, Marsili at lightweight, Mabuza at light welter and Yourdan at feather are all recognizable.

Bit of a personal note but I like how the IBF and IBO belts look as well. Although, imo, the British belt looks the nicest/most unique, albeit a domestic title and not a world title.
ajillusions is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 04:22 PM   #18
edgewood
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 276
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

Wbo in the past few years have had the best champs.
edgewood is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 04:24 PM   #19
turbotime
Future Hall Of Famer
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: LA/Canada
Posts: 18,297
vCash: 816
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

You really think the WBC belt looks better?

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
turbotime is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 04:35 PM   #20
MilesP
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 245
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montero View Post
Right now this is the ranking in terms of best to worst sanctioning bodies:

1. IBF
2. WBO
3. WBC
4. WBA

The WBA is historically the oldest santioning body and it's a shame that's it's become the worst of the major four groups. Honestly, even tough the IBO is considered a minor title, I probably put them above the WBA at this point - they are absolutely disgusting. They have numerous titlists in several divisions. Pathetic.

You're much better off going with the rankings from the fans/media, forget about the bogus sanctioning groups. ESPN's rankings are solid, Yahoo Sports and Ring Magazine are pretty good too.

Also, this is REALLY important. If somebody holds a belt, that only makes them a TITLIST (**** what the sanctioning body or anybody else says); it does NOT make them a champion. For example, Vitali Klitschko is a heavyweight titlist, but Wladimir Klitschko is the heavyweight champion. Sergio Martinez doesn't hold any sanctioning orginization's belt, but he is the middleweight champion.
completely agree...except for the bit about Wlad. How could you consider Wlad being the undisputed champ as long as he doesn't square off and win against Vitali? I realize this will never happen but he really isn't THE heavyweight champion as long Vitali is still around and still winning.
MilesP is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 04:41 PM   #21
Slacker
Big & Slow
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 3,388
vCash: 75
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSpeaker89 View Post
I have only started to become really interested in boxing this last 18 months, having had very little experience of watching it before hand.

I have read a lot of bashing of each of the four major organisations recognised by the International Boxing Hall of Fame.

Was wondering if anybody could explain which title is viewed as the best one to hold out of WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF? Where does The Ring title fit into this picture?

I read somewhere that the WBC title is perhaps the one most fighters want, but on this forum I have read many people put it down.

Hope someone can paint a clearer picture. Are world titles as highly regarded as they were say 20-30 years ago?

ps - sorry if this has been discussed at length before!

OK... its like this.

The short answer is, its open for debate. Each of the sanctioning bodies have pros/cons.

The long answer is...

Historically, the Lineal Championship was regarded as the "real championship". To become you the Lineal Champion you have to beat the current champion in the ring or... he has to retire/die and the #2 and #3 fighters face each other. The idea is that you "beat the man who beat the man".

Once sanctioning bodies came into the picture to "organize" things, they began to provide rankings and a belt... for a fee.

Don't be mistaken, you and I could pool our money together and start a sanctioning body tomorrow if we wanted. Their opinions are usually influenced by their own best interest and they are scam artists.

Regarding the sanctioning bodies..

My opinion is they rank like this:

The Ring (not really a sanctioning body, more on that in a min)

IBF - One champion per division, decent rankings.

WBC - Lots of bullshit titles, sometimes their rankings don't suck.

WBO - Essentially a meaningless title.

WBA - Bullshit rankings, gifting titles, complete horseshit.


A little history of them...

WBA - the oldest, founded in 1921 as the National Boxing Association, changed names to WBA in 1962. Today they are known for bullshit rankings, weak champions, multiple champions in each weight class, putting together backroom deals with Don King and a basic lack of any credibility. They were the only game in town until...

WBC - founded in Mexico in 1963. The WBC established many of today's safety measures in boxing, such as the standing eight-count, a limit of 12 rounds instead of 15, and additional weight classes (which a lot of people think unnecessary). Today the WBC is known for having a plethora of bullshit belts like "Diamond Champion", "Silver Champion" and more regional titles than anyone can remember. The WBC, while making shit tonnes of money on sanctioning fees...is actually hurting the sport by devaluing winning a title by putting so many out there.

IBF - Originated in September 1976 as the United States Boxing Association (USBA) when American members of the WBA withdrew in order to legitimize boxing in the United States with "unbiased" ratings. In April 1983, the organization established an international division that was known as the United States Boxing Association-International (USBA-I). In May 1984 it was renamed IBF. They were investigated in

WBO - was founded in 1988. When a WBO champion has reached "preeminent status" the WBO designate him as a "Super Champion". The WBO championships are not universally recognized. Some media sites do not include the WBO in their list of champions. This is a title that most don't have an opinion on. Their rankings usually suck.

The Ring - a boxing & wrestling magazine (at the time), was founded in 1922. The Ring has its own version of lineal championshipand began awarding in 1922, the first going to Jack Dempsey. They stopped giving belts to the world champions in the 1990s but began again in 2002.

In 2007 The Ring was bought by Golden Boy Promotions and its often said the rankings favor GBP fighters & agendas.

A fighter pays no sanctioning fees to defend or fight for the title at stake, contrary to practices of the sanctioning bodies.

In 2002, The Ring created a lineal championship system that is "intended to reward fighters who, by satisfying rigid criteria, can justify a claim as the true and only world champion in a given weight class".

The policy was updated in 2012 and there are now three ways that a boxer can win The Ring's title:

Defeat the reigning champion, Win a box-off between The Ring's #2 & #3 rated contenders. If the top contenders choose not to fight one another and either of them fights No. 3, No. 4 or No. 5, the winner may be awarded THE RING belt.

There are now also six ways that a boxer can lose The Ring's title:

Lose a fight, move weight classes, inactive for 18 mos, does not fight a top 5 contender for 2 yrs, retires/dies.
Slacker is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 04:42 PM   #22
MilesP
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 245
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

Quote:
Originally Posted by turbotime View Post
You really think the WBC belt looks better?

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
aesthetically speaking I think the IBF belt looks best..then WBA..WBC..and the WBO and IBO belts just look atrocious

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
MilesP is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 04:46 PM   #23
PityTheFool
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Poorer place without Johnny Tapia
Posts: 9,602
vCash: 75
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slacker View Post
OK... its like this.

The short answer is, its open for debate. Each of the sanctioning bodies have pros/cons.

The long answer is...

Historically, the Lineal Championship was regarded as the "real championship". To become you the Lineal Champion you have to beat the current champion in the ring or... he has to retire/die and the #2 and #3 fighters face each other. The idea is that you "beat the man who beat the man".

Once sanctioning bodies came into the picture to "organize" things, they began to provide rankings and a belt... for a fee.

Don't be mistaken, you and I could pool our money together and start a sanctioning body tomorrow if we wanted. Their opinions are usually influenced by their own best interest and they are scam artists.

Regarding the sanctioning bodies..

My opinion is they rank like this:

The Ring (not really a sanctioning body, more on that in a min)

IBF - One champion per division, decent rankings.

WBC - Lots of bullshit titles, sometimes their rankings don't suck.

WBO - Essentially a meaningless title.

WBA - Bullshit rankings, gifting titles, complete horseshit.


A little history of them...

WBA - the oldest, founded in 1921 as the National Boxing Association, changed names to WBA in 1962. Today they are known for bullshit rankings, weak champions, multiple champions in each weight class, putting together backroom deals with Don King and a basic lack of any credibility. They were the only game in town until...

WBC - founded in Mexico in 1963. The WBC established many of today's safety measures in boxing, such as the standing eight-count, a limit of 12 rounds instead of 15, and additional weight classes (which a lot of people think unnecessary). Today the WBC is known for having a plethora of bullshit belts like "Diamond Champion", "Silver Champion" and more regional titles than anyone can remember. The WBC, while making shit tonnes of money on sanctioning fees...is actually hurting the sport by devaluing winning a title by putting so many out there.

IBF - Originated in September 1976 as the United States Boxing Association (USBA) when American members of the WBA withdrew in order to legitimize boxing in the United States with "unbiased" ratings. In April 1983, the organization established an international division that was known as the United States Boxing Association-International (USBA-I). In May 1984 it was renamed IBF. They were investigated in

WBO - was founded in 1988. When a WBO champion has reached "preeminent status" the WBO designate him as a "Super Champion". The WBO championships are not universally recognized. Some media sites do not include the WBO in their list of champions. This is a title that most don't have an opinion on. Their rankings usually suck.

The Ring - a boxing & wrestling magazine (at the time), was founded in 1922. The Ring has its own version of lineal championshipand began awarding in 1922, the first going to Jack Dempsey. They stopped giving belts to the world champions in the 1990s but began again in 2002.

In 2007 The Ring was bought by Golden Boy Promotions and its often said the rankings favor GBP fighters & agendas.

A fighter pays no sanctioning fees to defend or fight for the title at stake, contrary to practices of the sanctioning bodies.

In 2002, The Ring created a lineal championship system that is "intended to reward fighters who, by satisfying rigid criteria, can justify a claim as the true and only world champion in a given weight class".

The policy was updated in 2012 and there are now three ways that a boxer can win The Ring's title:

Defeat the reigning champion, Win a box-off between The Ring's #2 & #3 rated contenders. If the top contenders choose not to fight one another and either of them fights No. 3, No. 4 or No. 5, the winner may be awarded THE RING belt.

There are now also six ways that a boxer can lose The Ring's title:

Lose a fight, move weight classes, inactive for 18 mos, does not fight a top 5 contender for 2 yrs, retires/dies.
Interesting post.
Remember the WBO() ranked the dead guy?
Got that book "Boxing Confidential" which covers the IBF investigation on my Amazon wish list.Have you read it?
PityTheFool is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 04:46 PM   #24
brickfists
The Nonpareil
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Dublin
Posts: 4,342
vCash: 542
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

you aint the champ till you got the ring belt.

allthough out of all the sanctioning bodies i like the ibf the most no interim, super, or diamond crap just one champ and there title is the nicest looking
brickfists is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 12:15 PM   #25
bailey
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: England
Posts: 13,367
vCash: 75
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

Quote:
Originally Posted by brickfists View Post
you aint the champ till you got the ring belt.

allthough out of all the sanctioning bodies i like the ibf the most no interim, super, or diamond crap just one champ and there title is the nicest looking
The ring is a magazine title that has ratings that I think often suits itself. Im guessing based on the opinions of the writers maybe. I dont take it too seriously.
Its the fighter not the belt
bailey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 01:45 PM   #26
tobias
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,140
vCash: 75
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

WBA Super, WBC, IBF, in no order. WBO is the fourth world title as importance. WBA Regular is not really a world title.
tobias is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 02:01 PM   #27
Jаck
P4P King
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: England
Posts: 368
vCash: 500
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

IBF is clearly the best out there. Imho, over the years WBO has surpassed both WBC and especially WBA in its legitimacy as a ranking body.
Jаck is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 02:12 PM   #28
thejokerswild
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,696
vCash: 75
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

Fluctuates in the end I don't even take notice. There can't be upto 4 champs and division vs division show no clear leader so i wouldnt get too sucked into giving an org credit over another. if you refer to the classic idea of a champ boxing is ****ed. P4p ranking or lineal status > than the big 4
thejokerswild is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 03:07 PM   #29
JASPER
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,589
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slacker View Post
OK... its like this.

The short answer is, its open for debate. Each of the sanctioning bodies have pros/cons.

The long answer is...

Historically, the Lineal Championship was regarded as the "real championship". To become you the Lineal Champion you have to beat the current champion in the ring or... he has to retire/die and the #2 and #3 fighters face each other. The idea is that you "beat the man who beat the man".

Once sanctioning bodies came into the picture to "organize" things, they began to provide rankings and a belt... for a fee.

Don't be mistaken, you and I could pool our money together and start a sanctioning body tomorrow if we wanted. Their opinions are usually influenced by their own best interest and they are scam artists.

Regarding the sanctioning bodies..

My opinion is they rank like this:

The Ring (not really a sanctioning body, more on that in a min)

IBF - One champion per division, decent rankings.

WBC - Lots of bullshit titles, sometimes their rankings don't suck.

WBO - Essentially a meaningless title.

WBA - Bullshit rankings, gifting titles, complete horseshit.


A little history of them...

WBA - the oldest, founded in 1921 as the National Boxing Association, changed names to WBA in 1962. Today they are known for bullshit rankings, weak champions, multiple champions in each weight class, putting together backroom deals with Don King and a basic lack of any credibility. They were the only game in town until...

WBC - founded in Mexico in 1963. The WBC established many of today's safety measures in boxing, such as the standing eight-count, a limit of 12 rounds instead of 15, and additional weight classes (which a lot of people think unnecessary). Today the WBC is known for having a plethora of bullshit belts like "Diamond Champion", "Silver Champion" and more regional titles than anyone can remember. The WBC, while making shit tonnes of money on sanctioning fees...is actually hurting the sport by devaluing winning a title by putting so many out there.

IBF - Originated in September 1976 as the United States Boxing Association (USBA) when American members of the WBA withdrew in order to legitimize boxing in the United States with "unbiased" ratings. In April 1983, the organization established an international division that was known as the United States Boxing Association-International (USBA-I). In May 1984 it was renamed IBF. They were investigated in

WBO - was founded in 1988. When a WBO champion has reached "preeminent status" the WBO designate him as a "Super Champion". The WBO championships are not universally recognized. Some media sites do not include the WBO in their list of champions. This is a title that most don't have an opinion on. Their rankings usually suck.

The Ring - a boxing & wrestling magazine (at the time), was founded in 1922. The Ring has its own version of lineal championshipand began awarding in 1922, the first going to Jack Dempsey. They stopped giving belts to the world champions in the 1990s but began again in 2002.

In 2007 The Ring was bought by Golden Boy Promotions and its often said the rankings favor GBP fighters & agendas.

A fighter pays no sanctioning fees to defend or fight for the title at stake, contrary to practices of the sanctioning bodies.

In 2002, The Ring created a lineal championship system that is "intended to reward fighters who, by satisfying rigid criteria, can justify a claim as the true and only world champion in a given weight class".

The policy was updated in 2012 and there are now three ways that a boxer can win The Ring's title:

Defeat the reigning champion, Win a box-off between The Ring's #2 & #3 rated contenders. If the top contenders choose not to fight one another and either of them fights No. 3, No. 4 or No. 5, the winner may be awarded THE RING belt.

There are now also six ways that a boxer can lose The Ring's title:

Lose a fight, move weight classes, inactive for 18 mos, does not fight a top 5 contender for 2 yrs, retires/dies.
Good history lessons for all the fans. I still have trouble recognizing the WBO belt as legit to this day (ranking the dead guy for monts did not help in that regards). Growing up I always thought the WBC was the oldest belt and thought the green belt was the most important one to have.

Today, the trinkets mean shit! it is the fighters who make the sport.

if I had to pick this second I would Go:

1) Ring
2) IBF
3) WBO
4) WBC
5) WBA

99) all the other BS trinkets out there

Historically:

1) Ring
2) WBC
3) WBA



7) IBF





20)WBO
JASPER is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 03:15 PM   #30
ripcity
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: "Somebody may beat me, but they are going to have to bleed to do it."
Posts: 10,232
vCash: 1069
Default Re: Which world title is most prestigious?

The Media and fans seem to like The Ring Magizane best
Boxers seem to like the WBC best.
The WBA has the longest history.
I have always thought that the IBF is the least shitty.
ripcity is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > General Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013