Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydney Smutt
I have always thought the National belt was worth more than what some fighters these days consider it... There are some massive holes in your argument. First, having a title sit there and go stale as was the case when Tony Mundine held so many at once is bad for the title, not better. What is the point of having a belt holder who never defends the title? There is even less exposure for the belt which will be harmful, not better.
|
I do see the problem and hole, but it is a catch 22. What is the point in having an Australian Title if it is not a title for the best fighter in the Australia. It instantly means nothing. If Kali (for example only) is a top 10 World ranked fighter, then he is the best fighter in Australia. If a challenger cannot beat enough fighters to make anyone think he is in the same class as him, then what right does he have to call himself the Australian Champion? Yes there would be no actual defences, but a real Australian champion would actually be represented in the media and every time he steps it up to World title level. This would increase his profile with the Australian media, and i dare say from time to time, the challengers could mount a case to challenger a world ranked Aussie fighter instead of climbing the ladder against fighters from other countries.
Quote:
Super defence? I think the WBA have proven how stupid that idea is... What is needed is regular, quality defences of the title - so how do we do that?
|
I wasnt suggesting that we have a 'Super' Champion. Although I suppose the system would be no different to what we really have now. Actually it is probably better on reflection. Is Kali Meehan not really the Australian Champion? Maybe we should have an ABF Champion and an Australian Champion? At least we could market who the real Australian Champion is and market it appropriately. (i do agree that it is not as good as one true champ like i suggested but it is better than nothing).
Quote:
|
My first port of call would be to return Oz title fights to 12 rounders (reducing them to 10 was the dumbest idea ever), therefore you are getting fighters who can go 12 fighting for the title which makes them more prepared for the future.
|
Agreed. But an out of the park idea, why not make them 15? That way our fighters would have something over and above the rest of the world?
Quote:
Secondly, you need to make the title more attractive to promoters to put on. There are some promoters such as Red Corner/Ace Boxing who are regular promoters of the belt which is fantastic although it does fit within the business mould of what they do and promoting regionals within their normal venue would not pay dividends at all...
|
I like the theory, but other than making the fight between the two best fighters (which reduces the number of Australan fights substantially in some cases only), how do you suggest the profile is raised. I dont think it can really be done (long term) any other way. A fight between two guys who are not the two best fighters will never really be a title fight despite what the promotion says and how many times you tell everybody. it will always be nothing more than a fight between contenders. Incidentally, with the right long term promotion of the Australian title, there is nothing wrong or unmarketable about that.
Quote:
so secondly, maybe the ANBF can look at the price rise for title fights and see if the fee can actually be reduced (was the hike necessary? Who knows? If they are having problems covering operating costs then fine, but if they just have money sitting in the bank, then what was the point?), bring the price down then we will see promoters more willing to put fights on. Maybe the ANBF can also look about clamping down on organisations using titles such as "Australasian" or "Commonwealth" - these titles historically have a tie to national titles (although the tie to the Commonwealth is a tad tenuous, maybe it could be brought in during a CBC meeting that National Title holders are giving priority in rankings, so that those who wish to follow the CBC path will have to go through the National title).
|
I dont really know much about all that but dont seem to disagree with any. I will say regarding fees (which are the biggest problem with the scenario i proposed) that the only way to make the fees worthwhile is to increase what the organisation is actually giving the promoter. They need to run things so well, that you dont want to do things without them. This is where boxing organisations have pretty much totally fell down. Then NRL or AFL football organisations have succeeded because they have it so that they have attracted money from outside sources and it is realistically near impossible for others to go ahead without them (yes i know about superleage). Inboxing it is a little different, but the organisation needs to go ahead and do things which maike it attractive for promoters. They should be helping find sponsors for the title fights, they should be arranging assistants/willing volunteers to help with anything the promoter wants, they should have a professional media arm that actually helps the promoters get publicity for their fights. There are lots of things which they can be doing to give the promoter / fighters value for the sanctioning fee. They will not mind spending if it is actually doing something for them. I am not in the boxing no, but i am willing to bet that there is little return for what is spent, other than the belt.
Quote:
Are you sure Mundine didn't prove himself domestically when he won the National Title from Marc Bargero? He beat a good defending National title holder and beat others before and after from Oz who were in his division. Who did he duck there that could have beaten him? I think on a national level Choc more than proved himself.
|
My memory is fading so i cant really remember that far back too well
But i can remember that Mundine had just won the Australian Title, and the title was valued so much by the media and public that the papers were still talking about how he would never be a boxing success or make anything of himself. My point was that to be an australian champion is making a success of himself! I am pretty sure that when he won this title Names such as Rick Thornberry were thrown up as fighters he needed to beat before he was considered the best fighter in Australia. If that was the case, then those fighters should have been the Australian Champion, imo. The titles had just devalued so much.
And by the way, i agree regarding Mundine. I think it is great the way that he makes money out of and promotes big domestic fights. No one comes close to him. And it is because he made it important to be the best domestic fighter again. ANd this is why he managed to make money. Sadly he had to get everyone to hate him to do it, but proving who was the best fighter in his division met something again, and not only did we start to see good promoted local fights, but the contenders really stepped it up themselves. Thornberry, Green, Soliman, Geale etc. You need to give people a reason to want to watch fights, and a paper title is not really one of them, imo. A well respected true championship with history behind it is a different story. Even if (or perhaps especially if) it is only defended every couple of years.
Quote:
Lastly 8 divisions only. REALLY? How is this a good idea? The Australian title, whether you like it or not has always been a stepping stone title for most - they win that belt, prove themselves "The Man" (no reference to Choc, Pioneer. Pull your pants back up), then move onto Commonwealth then World title honours. Obviously with the current climate with CBC belts out of vogue for most in our region and organisation's regionals being the progression path this format is slightly different although the premise is the same. If you remove divisions that are competed in at the international and world level, you are doing our fighters chances a world of hurt for their natural career progression. There needs to be a title available for each division that is competed world-wide, anything less is ridiculous and why the Super-Cruiserweight title was such a ridiculous idea...
|
I am not suggesting that we stop fights at weights such as super bantamweight. Just toying with the idea of having national rankings/titles at these weights. The advantage is that there will be more competition for rankings and this will make it easier to market and promote to the general public (not the hardcore). I doubt the average Joe could name one Australian champion. I am not even convinced that i could name one, to be honest as who knows who has been stripped.
Yet, if you really stopped and thought about it, if there were just 8 weight divisions, there could be so many great marketable title defences that could be made and promoted.
12-09-2011, 01:31 AM
Re: Australian titles
Top 
