Does anyone else not pay attention to titles at all?

I couldn't care less about the alphabet belts. They are all bogus and they have metastasized like the cancer they are. In the 35 years I've followed boxing they've gone from two to at least 4 major ones and a host of other belts I don't even know the names of. And TWO was one too many!!!!

 

wbc just ranking fighters who werent even ranked before just to accomodate wilder

 

I pay attention to belts/sanctioning body rankings and network/promotional(adviser/managerial:rofl)politics because they are real things that exist.

 

I think people do pay attention to titles. If all of the sudden all the sanctioning bodies decide to close their business, people will be asking who is the champion and new sanctioning bodies will start up again.

 

Not at all

Any boxing fan knows who the real top dog of the division is, regardless of whos holding whatever trinkets hostage

 

Titles mean nothing to me and I honestly couln't tell you what belts Floyd has or Kovalev has or GGG has. It's too hard to keep track of who has what and besides the titles themselves don't carry the prestige that they used to.
I care far more about who the best fighters are in any one division rather than who holds some paper title.

 

they're still pretty much out there, and have some meaning at least.
just out of historical standpoints people compare a lot of accomplishments from the winning of those belts, wich we know can give very warped impressions of a fighter.

Just take a look at the ridiculousness that is Adrien Broner the 3 division beltholder and former Ring P4P #5, when you look at the mere facts behind it. The WBA interim and regular bull, the WBC manipulating things in each and every way to get US, Mexican and Mexican American beltholders. The fact some of the holders never deserved to get one due to robberies or due to just putting up a vacant one against a completely undeserving foe. Catchweight fights keeping and defending belts and the fact that some fighters don't even have to defend their belt(s) against mandatories at all.

But they still count for something, they're not completely irrelevant.
If the alphabets would uphold their own rules for once and actually started to endorse or even force unification, they can actually be very relevant again.

 

Whether you-or me-like it or not a belt still has a lot of weight in and outside of the world of box aficionados.

 

I have a faint track of some, but that's about it. There are too many titles and divisions to keep track of unfortunately but I do know who the champions are in most divisions, just not the belts they hold.

 

I don't really take much notice of 'which' title the fighter has but i do recognize them as a current title holder/champ;ion. if that makes sense.

 

I wish there was ONE sanctioning body, 3 belts per division. Gold, Silver, and Bronze Champion.

 

Good post Alex

 

:good

 

What would be the point to Gold, Silver Bronze belts?

I do not pay attention much to the belts, only the matchups.