Anyone else hate the weakness of the Commonwealth belt.

Nah the European title still holds great prestige, although the fact that there's 4 'World titles' now somewhat makes it slightly less prestigious as often there will be a European fighter holding one of those belts when in the past he'd have competed for the European title instead.

The British title still has quite a bit of credibility aswell, as does the Japanese(in the lower weight-classes).
I wouldn't class any of them as trinkets.

International, Inter-Continental or NABA/NABO/NABF/USBA are trinkets, and although I wouldn't be as insulting to name any national title as a trinket, some aren't quite what they used to be due to the introduction of these other meaningless belts and fake World titles.

 

what's the commonwealth belt? :rasta

 

the real damage for me in boxing is when, for example, kessler fought a much more impressive list of genuine contenders at SMW than calzaghe had before they met, then kessler lost and palle's confidence in his fighter plummeted.

sartisan, haussler and a paper belt were palle's answer to that loss at a time when kessler had a foothold and exposure to Us based fights through his ESPn interview and the fight itself.

it was embarrassing - and the beginning of the end for palle (deservedly so).

let the euro fighters fight over trinkets and let those who are good enough to fight against world class opposition do that.
unfortunately, fighters like kessler picking up a paper belt off a limited fighter is like man united challneging barnet to a trophy they invented.