Since when did the WBO become a legit world title??? THEY SUCK

The WBO has the worst champions, the worst contenders, and strips fighters every few days. The belt is meaningless. Guys like Calzaghe brought credibility to the belt but really isnt enough. I respect all pro fighters but the real world titles are the IBF, WBC, WBA

 

Maybe if floyd would get it, it might be legit world title for u.

 

The champ makes the belt... Not the other way around

Anyway, I do agree that WBO suck. See the reign of Calzaghe,Grigorian,Michalewski,Erdei,Eubank,Margarito ect.....

I see the wbo as a title that lesser european fighters fight for mainly these days. It seems frank warren has very good ties with them (his fighters get alot of wbo title shots), and so does that german promoter (universum i think)

 

Belts don't mean **** except as "trinket's & bargaining chip's" for more money.
The fighter representing, the belt itself is worthless.

 

If we ****ing accept this WBO as a reputable belt where will it all stop?

 

LOL you must be a Pac-Man fan. Those "7 world titles" are a huge accomplishment....too bad it was for a belt with little credibility. Boxing already has enough belts, and guys like Calzaghe, Margarito, Chris Eubank, and other Euro-fighters hold the belt hostage, fight no-name non world class fighters and are called "World Champion". Until Calzaghe fought for another belt his opposition was terrible, a shot Eubank, Tudwill, and whoever else.

 

All belts are crap these days, and their organisations laden with corruption.

Even the Ring belt has lost some credibility due to GBP owning The Ring.

The absolute worst for me would have to be the WBA though. They made up a Super Champion belt for dominant champions. The regular WBA belt held by these champions then goes back into circulation for other fighters to win and claim as a legit belt. So you can have 2 WBA champions in the same division. ****ing ridiculous.

 

:smoke

 

but you have to agree, the wbo probobly has the worse level of comp fighting for its vacant belts, the worst mados, and a plethora of champs with questionable world championship calibure defenses...

I know the other orgs are bad too, but the wbo is on a diff level imo

 

:good Exactly, at least when a fighter with the IBF, WBA, or WBC meet, it usually defines who is the boss in the class. The WBO trinket just defines glorified contenders, nothing more or less

 

Just furthering the dilution of the sport.

 

Fighter makes the belt anyway.

To answer the question I think somewhere in the late 80's early 90s.

 

Don't think any belt should be accepted mate, it never stops anyways, IBO, ABC, DEF, ZXY....its just stupid.

They all need to go an just have one damn belt per division. Its silly that there are 3/4 officially recognised belts as it is

 

The only belt that matters, is the WWE HARDCORE belt. Any place, any time, and rules. Thats how real men fight :!:

 

We should be whittling the belts down to one not expanding from three to four.