your talking about the the asphetics then yes the british title is the best. in terms of the actual level of champions and clallanger no.
Listen, you're entitled to your views as I am mine - that goes for everybody, even Slap I'd just consider winning the British title and defending it against my leading contemporaries a very noteworthy achievement, personally speaking. More so than winning the European title, I'd just skip it and head for world level. The term ''European level'' is practically redundant, given that many of the leading continental fighters don't bother with the European title anymore and take the interalphabetty route. The board needs to encourage fighters to retain the British title rather than binning it to allow other people to have it, and defending such title in the event of a defeat at world level, just as Jason Booth has just done.
I don't care, every British fighter should aim to win the Lonsdale Belt in their weight class. Finance and a wider range of challengers with the EBU title is a given, but there have been a few wank champions and challengers at EBU level as well.
The Lonsdale belt probably has more historical value but the european title is a step higher. There will be times when the Brit champ is better than the European but most boxers generally will move from British to European before moving up to world level if they are good enough
See this is where its really about the level of opposition your facing and not the actual title itself. Perfect example is Ricky Burns. He may be WBO champion but his last defence and next will be agaisnt guys who would be below average challangers for a European & Commonwealth title. I would tip Foster Jnr, Skykes and Walsh to beat Learya and Evanson. If the tougher fights are defending the euro, you defend it, if the tougher fights are defending the british, you defend it. I think the point many have tried to make is that if your european champion you can still defend agaisnt the best in britain. I think in general we see better challangers for the British title for reasons other than talent. The challangers coming from europe generally get short notice. But you more likley to get a very very tough fight for the European. Jamoye, Konecny and Frenkel all examples of european challangers that gave very good accounts of themselves.
I agree but every fighter should also aim to win there continental title. theres been plenty of crap british champions and challangers to.
Its a toufh one but I have to go with the British Title, it's the Lonsdale Belt and to own one outright is a fantastic acheivement...:yep
This is class Rob, you can apply 99% of that to WBU too. You do realise Europe is in the world? WBU > European.
theres no agenda. every point I made is valid. have a bigger talent pool is only part of the reason. combined with the others i mentioned it makes it a more valuable belt. we are talking about valid titles. WBU does not count as one as theres no mandatorys. without them a title is meaningless. The British, European, WBC, IBF, WBO, WBA, Commonwealth title all have them. The other crappy belts don't and thats why there just meaningless trinkets put onto fights to sell a few more tickets.
First can i clear up you do realise the World is part of the Universe?? That means every Earthling can fight for the UBO title along with those from Mars, Venus, Jupiter, The Sun etc. The UBO is better than the WBU for several simple reasons. 1) You have a larger talent pool figthing for it 2) Fighters gain more recognition and a higher ranking 3) The fighters purse will be higher as TV pay more and attendences are higher for Universal title fights.
fighters do NOT gain more recognition, get a better ranking and a higher purse figthing for the WBU/IBA/IBO or for the European title?? like I said its a combination of that with the bigger talent pool which make the Euro more prestigious.