The problem with mandatories is that the rankings don't really reflect the skill level of fighters. If you pay the WBC a nice set of sanctioning fees, they'll give you some sort of plastic belt and you're already in the top 15. That's why I only really respect the lineal title. That's the only title which hasn't been corrupted through money and politics. It's pure lineage.
And yet half the guys on the forum want to suck Bowe's dick, and 85% of them want to give a handjob to Larry Holmes, both of whom abjectly ran from mandos. Look, I agree with you in theory. "Champions" have to be fighting someone worth fighting. But in the era of multiple titles, there are several problems: 1) It compounds the problem caused by multiple titles. There is only one world, and there should only be one world champion, not four. Similarly, if someone is good enough to unify 3-4 belts, he should not have 3-4 "#1 contenders." The organizations should have to agree on a #1 for unified champs...one a year, no more. 2) The nonsense of 4 #1 contenders means that, if the rules are well kept, there can never be a unified champ. We are seeing it right now in action. This generation's Ali-Frazier may not happen because Joshua may have to fight a cruiserweight--a guy that I love to watch fight, by the way. But still, are you telling me that Pulev-,Usyk and Whyte should not have to wait until there is a unifed champ? Only one #1 per champ...no more, with unification taking precedence. 3) **** "#1 contenders." Kubrat Pulev at this stage is not a mando in any sane universe. These organizations are corrupt, and it is well known that a lot of the guys who get mando status do so because they paid for it. But again, you are not entirely wrong.
Boxing doesn't want a unified champ. Fans do, but boxing wants the issue forever in question, a question that can only be answered by a further revenue generating event. Boxing wants multiple belts, because as long as fans give the, credence they can be used the sell events and inflate the status of otherwise unremarkable fighters. The WBSS was the best thing to happen to boxing in years, at least at cruiserweight fans got just what they wanted, great fights, the best fought the best, the belts were unified and there was an overwhelming and incontrovertible answer to who was the best man in the division. Sadly, it's always money that gets in the way. In other weight divisions he best guys won't enter, knowing they can get more money fighting stiffs on heir own network. Easy work if you can get it.
I tend to agree with the OP that mandatorys should happen as the 'opponent' has fought his way into that position so they 'deserve' their shot. But I also think mandatory should be over looked only for undisputed not just unification. Dillian Whyte being a prime example he more than deserves his shot but I think he should be over looked in favour of undisputed.
The mandatory system needs to be improved to actually rank the number 1 non-champion rather than whoever has the WBC intercontinental interim Latino belt. I agree with and fully support forcing champs to fight worthy challengers who are being avoided.
People on both sides of the argument make sense. I feel mandatories are good for giving hungry young lions their shot ... but at the same time I've seen some horrible mandatories that make no sense to me at all. Wasn't Dominic Wade a mando for GGG? Like, wtf.
This is a unique situation due to covid though. Mandatory challengers having to wait their turn whilst the boxing public finally get a super fight at a time when it really matters doesn't really bother me. It's going to take a couple of years to shake out. That's too bad for some but it can't be helped. We're not talking about fighters who haven't been given opportunities and made a decent chunk of change here.
It is quite likely you could fight nothing but mandatories and never face a top caliber fighter for years
Mandatories are a double edged sword, they can force good fights to happen or delay good fights from happening. It's honestly one of those things you have to look at case by case.
