Has too many champion belts watered down boxing

There has always been 'too many belts'. I have a copy of the first Ring from February 1922 and they are moaning about that...

Boxing as a world sport has never been bigger and TV wants their big fights to be for a belt. Who are we to rob a fighter of a payday and strip them of their belt?!

We, in theory, are the lucky ones. Most who post particularly on this forum are boxing smart enough to recognise top fighters without the need of a 'belt' for guidance.

 

Yes, it has ruined it, the worse thing that could happen to boxing is precisely that, so many belts people lose interest. The history of the sport is more appealing to me than the present tbh.

 

Absolutely 1000% yes, these belts have destroyed Boxing. I’m a hardcore fan and even i don’t understand this sh*t. Casual fans laugh at this crap, freaking 5 belts per weight class it’s ridiculous.

 

Yes.

I'd like two belts per division, as it can then lead to a real unification superfight.

 

certainly.

What could help this a ton---for us the fans---is for all the organizations policy of not recognizing other champions. In theory, that way other champs would be rated number 2 or 3 and be the mandatory.

That is in theory only. I'm certain the organizations would find a way to not rate another champion or have him like number 8

 

How many Champions were there in1922?
Boxing isn't run for hard core fans like us, it's run for ,and financially sustained by casuals ,without whose $£$£$ it would be dead in the water. I go to shows and a good 60 % of the audience are walking around getting booze and ,food, with their women parading around, they aren't there for the fights.The vast majority of them don't even watch the supporting bouts .They couldn't even name three world champs let alone the original 8 title holders. They spend the evening on their mobile phones so they can show their mates where they were,and what they were doing Saturday night.
On the British forum there are guys perfectly happy to have David Price as a replacement for Joseph Parker against Derek Chisora on a ppv! That's the state of boxing now!

 

To be fair, this is also a major prevelance of the millennial and smartphone / gen z era. It's not reduced to just boxing shows.

 

It didn't happen unless I recorded it on my phone and annoyed, and distracted the people around me.vacuous,discourteous,and ultimately stupid because you can have it recorded at home should you want to reprise it!
Another favourite is going out for a smoke ,to sniff some **** up your nose in the toilet whilst a round is on.Used to be people waited until a round had ended before making every **** in their row get up to let them out,manners , like common sense, seems to be in short supply nowadays.

 

But that is my point, boxing needs the shiny things to keep many of the fancy happy.

As for the 'eight champs' thing, that has nearly always been a myth. There has always been rival championships and often more than eight weight divisions. In 1922 for instance the National Boxing Association and New York State Athletic Commission were giving out belts. Also individual states and the now horribly named 'Negro titles' were available, and that was just in the US. Sometimes the UK, Europe, Canada and Australia would recognise different 'world' title holders too.

 

Point is that up to Ali retiring in 1980 everyone knew who the worlds champion was. During the Holmes era we had the Tate, Weaver, Dokes charade but most knew Holmes was the man. THEN post Holmes everything started to become muddled. Today it’s just a complete mess beyond anyone’s imagination. The commissions don’t care as championship bouts are lucrative for them. They want a completely muddled boxing scene.

 

There have been many times we have had undisputed champions.Look at the past Ring ratings.

 

I think it does.
Being a champion isn't as special as it used to be. You'd have one champion, the best and baddest fighter in the division, take on and beat anyone willing to test their mettle.

Now, belts are filled with politics. It's no longer just beat the man or beat the top fighters, now it's pay your fees, defend against bums because the commission said so, and maaaaybe unify if the stars align. The fact that there are 4 main champions, plus interim, gold, diamond, super, world, and large with fries champions flooding the landscape just adds that it's no longer as much of an achievement and any fight can randomly be slapped with the "For the WBC special welterweight championship" label.

This also affects casual fans. It's anecdotal evidence, but the other day I was talking to my friend about sports and asked if he likes boxing. His reply was "Yeah I like watching it, but I can't fully get into it because all the championship stuff in weight classes confuses me". It alienates new fans rather than drawing them in.

 

By definition you cannot have a 'undisputed champion' they would never fight!!!

There indeed have been 'generally recognised' champs, but when looking at them Ring ratings, take into account Nat Fleischer and 'The Ring' was as political as any other organisation in boxing. There was rarely only the 'Classic Eight' champions and just as much politics, and sometimes the 'politics' was nastier than today.

 

Undisputed right to be called champion.WTF are you on? Argument pills?