Would you be happy with a single belt per weight division? Poll

yes, that would be great, and the motivation for guys to get title shots and make the most of it would be tremendous. But it won't happen. There is too much fees and money to be earned. At least they should just allow the 4 top ones. WBC, WBA. IBF and WBO and then unify from those.. But they won't.

 

I dont mind multiple belts, gives the champions something to go after other than defending the one they have. Although like you say some of them are content to milk the one they have. I wish they would place other champions into mandatory positions more often. Never understood how Anthony Joshua is not put in as number 1 mandatory for Parker and Wilders belts.

If there was just the one belt per division i really wouldnt mind though.

 

This is a naive question. Multiple belts are a symptom, not the disease. Championships won't be clear If the best don't regularly fight the best, with no mechanism forcing them to, regardless whether there is one or ten outside orgs handing out straps.

In fact the title orgs when they enforce mandatories are better for boxing than promoters who protect their boxers with mismatches.

 

I believe multiple belts are extremely detrimental and a big part of why the best won't fight the best. In fact, I would say they're a big part of why boxing is struggling.

Top fighters will often...
1. Get one belt and refuse to fight anyone half decent.
2. Target the easiest belt holder and ignore the toughest belt holder

In addition, all the other points you made, @James Smith, were quite accurate.

I think the WBSS offers a solution to much of this.

For the record, I do actually think that reducing boxing to one belt per weight class, although an impossible feat, would mostly force the best to fight the best. So I disagree completely with @qwertyblahblah.

 

100 %... best fight the best then, no arguing or ducking

 

Nah. Joshua or rather his promoter says that from now on he’s only going to fight twice a year.If he was the sole champ, I want to see more than 2 heavyweight titles fights a year.

 

One Champion

Who knows if Joshua-Parker/ Joshua-Wilder will ever take place. If we have one Belt fighters will be hungrier to fight the champion.

AJ/Parker/Wilder will we ever know who is the real number one. They won't fight and all three have titles so the fans are left speculating

 

Yes, but it hasn't been that way since the 1920s

I do think there are some positives for multiple belts, particuarly for the high-risk/low-reward fighters. They're more likely to win one belt with so many to choose from, and it can be used as a marketing tool. For instance, I don't think HBO would have put up for the money for fights like Mosley-Forrest 1 and Mosley-Wright 1 if they weren't unification bouts. Possibly likewise for Margarito-Williams if there wasn't a WBO title at stake.

But 4 major belts plus all this "super champ" and "regular champ" **** is ridiculous.

Going back to the 1920s to early 1980s thing of two major titles is fine with me.

 

I don't mind multiple belts. They make unifications more fun. Thing is how to make those belt holders unify. Maybe we need a body to regulate those sanctioning bodies.

 

YES!!! This 4-5 "champs" per division is crap and hurts the sport in multiple ways

 

I think Homer Simpson said it best...

This content is protected

(Starts at around 0:09)

And I don’t think having multiple belts hurts the sport per se, but do wish they would stop with the “And now we’re introducing the super emerald happy special aztec belt made with diamonds” crap...

 

This. Even in the UFC, which has 1 belt per weight class Cain held the belt hostage for almost two years.

 

Good find Rip smokin Joe that was cool

 

I was only discussing this the other day. I also think there should be ONE governing body for the whole of Boxing and possibly less weight divisions or a slight difference in the weights
Lets be honest Adrien Broner is a 4 yes FOUR weight world champion how the F...