Create Your Own Sanctioning Body (Fantasy Game)

After another debate with another poster recently on the subject of whether or not the Ring title is the only genuine world title out there that anyone should care about (I believe it is and have never shirked my beliefs on this issue), what strikes me is many fans can still not agree which sanctioning body is indeed the best gauge of who actually is the genuine 'world champion' and also which one has the most integrity.

Now, we all have our gripes with the sanctioning bodies and I readily acknowledge that the big four and the Ring title have plusses, but, equally, I also accept that they each do have their own flaws. The question is simple:

If you could create your own sanctioning body, what system would you implement in order to rank fighters, determine world champions and also what would you do to uphold the integrity of the organsiation?

Would you do away with crap rankings, interim/ recess/ super special titles, et al? Would you introduce Olympic style testing? Would you market the organisation the same the the UFC has had great success with?

I have my own views on this issue, but I don't want to load the thread with my opinion as I am very keen to see what everyone thinks first. Thoughts, as always, are welcome:good.

 

One title belt (that's a given)

The title would be decided by taking the four title holders and having them fight a tournament to determine the champion.

In order to gain a title shot you must be the mando.

In order to be the mando, you must beat at least 3 of the top ten ranked fighter.

The champion can take one voluntary after he defends against a ranked contender. Champ must fight 3 times a year (barring injury) and will be stripped if he doesn't.

The body takes only administrative costs from the fighter; no stupid sanctioning fees or anything.

 

The body doesn't rank anybody in their top 15 who has been dead for more than a two year period.

 

One title.

No ''inter-continental'' or ''WBO NABO'' BS titles.

National and regional (eg Euro) titles carry more say.

Mandatory defence against the #1 contender - if you refuse, stripped. If the mando refuses, he loses his ranking.

One voluntary allowed - must be against a fellow top 10.

Sanctioning body reserves right to order immediate rematch in event of genuine controversy.

Weight hopping is not permitted. In order to move up in weight you must vacate and beat top 10 fighters in the new division in order to obtain a title shot.

Olympic style drug testing for ALL bouts at or above domestic title level - procedures for four round scratchers tbc!

------------------------------------------------

The Ring title does have it's merits, but there is no mandatory contender, and a champ can basically fight domestic level fighters and still retain it. Plus, it's history is flawed - not every title was given to the linear claimant.

 

Thanks for the points, fellas (nice that at least some of you gave opinions):good. Interesting that others feel the same way about 'contenders' being given easy paths to titles; I suppose it has a lot to do with this modern obsession of protecting the '0' and also promoters (not naming names) having sanctioning bodies in their pocket and also trying to dupe the public into thinking that their fighter is 'the' world champion. Also, I agree, Beeston- the joke baubles would go straight away if I could do anything about it in a fantasy world. I don't think the orgs realise that in giving out extra trinkets for more sanctioning fees, they actually delegitmise and sully their actual titles. Interesting point about voluntaries being ranked in the top ten and anything else would result in stripping as well.

I think if there was one organisation, it would be a hell of a lot easier marketing the sport as a whole, ala UFC. Hardcore fans, media outlets and casual fans will know that the world championship is at stake. I think this is where boxing is missing a trick with the UFC as well. Of course there are other MMA bodies, but the UFC is recognised as the best and gains the most coverage.

What annoys me most about sanctioning bodies is that they really aren't as relevant as people would have us believe. Look at JMM-Diaz last year. It was an awesome fight on it's own and then the WBA and WBO jumped on the bandwagon to market themselves as sponsoring world class fighters and also in order to bring some sort of extra special significance to the fight that really didn't need or deserved to be there. It's like 'this world champion is sponsored by this org, and that champ is sponsored by that org'. Utterly pathetic, IMO.

I often wonder how many multi-championship claims great contenders of yesteryear would have if they were able to take their pick of 4 'major' titles.

 

There are several things I'd implement but most of them being enforcable depend on my sanctioning body having a monopoly.

ie. I'd like mandatories every 12/ 18 months but I'd be very loathe to strip champs because it loses the linearality (sp) of the title, which is a big deal for me. The only way that would realistically work would be if my title was the only one availiable.

 

The only way multiple sanctioning bodies could possibly work is if a fighter had to align himself with a particular organisation - as in darts.

That sucks..... but boxing in that respect is far worse!

Yet I'm still watching.... it is a silly state of affairs when becoming world champion isn't the be all and end all in a sport really.

 

Screw the UFC way of doing things, the actual 'UFC' product is what sells and not the fighters themselves on the most part.

If I owned the WBC or another sanctioning body, I'd have it so the champion could only fight somebody in the top ten as a voluntary defence. If a unification is negotiated between the two fighters promoters then by policy, that is the ONLY way you can avoid your own mandatory challenger.

I would make close ties to the other sanctioning bodies aswell.

And to be contriversial.... a champion from a different weight has the right to face the champion from his own weight without fighting ANY other contenders if they choose. Especially at heavyweight!!
I give no sympathy for flabby heavyweight contenders who insult the rich heritage of the sport by coming to fight looking like Mr blobby. :fire



One more OBVIOUS thing I forgot..... 15 rounds!! 15 rounds!! 15 rounds!!

 

yeah, the way they make the best fight the best. Idiots eh:huh

 

Championship bouts would be back to 15 rounds.
Judges who screw up 2 bouts will be suspended, and after another screwup forever blacklisted from my sanctionbody.
CHallengers who pull a Johnson, can't get a top 10 rating for at least 2 years.

 

Nah, I mean the way they constantly use they're brand in the way (if you can imagine) for instance all WBO ranked fighters are signed to the WBO brand and any fighter within it fights in arenas with headlined name of WBO Boxing or something? rather than the two main event fighters headlining themselves. If it was like that how would anyone ranked in the WBO fight somebody from the IBF,WBA or WBC?

This is what happens in MMA. The best UFC fighters don't get to face the best fighters in other MMA organizations.... some are more credible than others but it simply isn't possible for the best to fight the best.

 

True, like Fedor. I get what you're saying:good

 

**** yeah! I forgot about getting back 15 rounders.... how could I forget? atsch

 

No worries.

 

i like fleaman's and the beeston brawler's rule post's the only thing i would add would be that tittle fights are over 15 rounds