Are Multiple World Champions Actually a Good Thing?

No it isn't in my opinion. Makes it easy for some semi talented fighters
to win multiple championships across multiple weight classes . Giving
them the appearance of being something special when in reality
they've only manipulated a very flawed championship system.

 

Multiple champions were created to make money - not for the fighters - but for the alphabet organizations. By creating their own champ they gain sanctioning fees with every title bout. And when multiple champs weren't enough, they created a new weight class. Again, everything was to line their pockets. It didn't matter to them that there was 4 champs (at least) looking for work and picking apart the top 10 to the point where they were putting clubfighters against the champ, because they were still getting their sanctioning fee. When guys like us have a hard time trying to remember a champ, I think back to the point when people on the street who were casual fans in between baseball games could tell you something about a fighter. So no, they are not good for boxing and neither are at least 6 weight classes.

 

It just gives more reason for the top fighters in a division not to fight

 

Should we have 2 super bowl champs? 2 NBA champs? 2 Stanley cup champs?

why stop there let’s have 2 presidents. 2 prime ministers. 2 mvp’s...2 fights and fighters of the year.

not sure I get the whole more than 1 champ...either you is or you ain’t

 

I think the ABC Governing belts should be there, I just think they should be called something else Rather than world championships.

They are not world championships. They are in themselves trophies rather than actual championships unless the top fighter in a weight class actually has one of them. It’s really only a place in the rankings unless they beat the top guy.

Boxing fans generally have an idea who the real champion of most weight classes actually are. And there generally is really only one at each class. A guy who beat the guy who beat the guy. It really isn’t difficult if only the media consulted people who follow boxing rather than accept what a governing body or a promoter is pushing.

most forums or magazines will list the top dude in each weight class. Boxrec rankings for instance is one example or any magazine.

And this is what really should be promoted more rather than the trophies associated with the so called governing bodies. They don’t care Who the best guy with the best credentials is at each weight class. They just provide a trophy. I think the mainstream media need to focus on who the experts and fans recognise as real champions rather than note who has a strap. And they should only ever reserve the word “champion” for the majority expert view of who the champion is.

it’s not difficult.

A multiple champion only becomes a multiple champion if he first beats a legitimate champion rather than Just a belt holder. Most of these guys are only contenders who went through a few weights.

 

I have no problem with multiple title holders.


If I fighter makes more money because of a 'belt', good for them.


If it attracts more fans because their person is a champ or challenging for a title, great.


I do not buy this, 'it is stops big fights'. If the fight is viable, the free market will make it.


And the argument that it stops finding out who is the best, is often irrelevant. The casual fan generally does not care, and us hardcore get to do what we like best... Debate the merits of each fighter, and come to a conclusion.

 

You get more than one title. There are national American Football champs; and the Champions League Basketball in Europe is a big deal. Ice Hockey too has big national tournaments outside of North America.


And Football (Soccer) is forever debating who is the best.

Some Countries do have Presidents and Prime Ministers, that can for good as well as bad help the state. And there are examples of two MVPs or fights/fighters of the year.

Boxing gets boring when everything is black or white, it needs the friction/tension to sell the sport.

 

The only way to settle who is best is to have them face each other. I can't imagine hardcore fans being satisfied with arguing over who would win.

 

Also the free market has manifestly failed to result in many big fights getting made.

Look at Moorer for example. He missed out on nearly all the top heavyweights of his era even though fighting them would have generated considerable revenue.

 

A satisfied hardcore fan, is not trying hard enough!

 

No. Stupid question.

 

Really? I think Lewis fighting Bruno in front of 60k is easier and a better money maker. Moorer did not really catch on with the casual fan the way he should have. But that was poor promotion. The casual fan did not really care for Moorer Vs Lewis or Bowe, because if they did, it probably happens.

 

I can't imagine casual fans would prefer seeing Moorer fight mismatch after mismatch against overmatched opponents than take on ranked opponents. Even if Moorer wasn't popular with casual fans, it stands to logic they would be more interested in seeing him in competitive fights.