The last time I checked, an UNDISPUTED champion needs the WBC, WBA and IBF belts. Just those three. When I started watching boxing in the early 90s the WBO was a jokeshop belt. Tyson and Lewis never bothered with it. Akinwande ditched the WBO belt to get a fight with Lewis for the WBC. The WBO belt was worn by who Tyson Fury calls "British world champions". It seemed to be Frank ******'s pet organisation. It's strap fought over by Brits, in Britain, whilst the real champions sorted out the business-end of the divisions in America - where few of the WBO Brits would dare to tread. Has it's stature risen of late?
I think belts gain clout by the guy holding it The WBO has been held by some great fighters and can be seen as a world title Im guessing around 2000 or so. The Klitschkos did a lot to legitimize it De La Hoyas first 2 titles at his first 2 weight classes came in the form of the WBO and most seem to count those and that was the 90's
On paper yes. But having 2 belts and/or the ring belt is enough for most people to acknowlede you. Wlad was pretty much THE champ for most when he unified with Ibragimov, and for all when he won the ring belt against Chagaev.
I'd say 3 out of 4 is pretty undisputed I mean politics dont usually let all 4 be held at once I know Hopkins did it briefly at 160 before the WBA stripped Calzaghe pretty much did it too though the IBF may have stripped going into the Kessler fight where he won the WBC and WBA
I don't think being stripped of belts counts. If you've won them all, as Calzaghe did at 168, but don't hold them all simultaneously then that fighter is still undisputed. Let's say also that Fury beats Wlad in the rematch. But Fury gets stripped of the IBF. Wilder then beats Fury and holds the WBC, WBA an WBO. Wilder is the undisputed champ, IMO, and has no need to chase the IBF belt. I guess it's complicated. However, the WBO has never figured in any undisputed champ's "must have" belts in all the champions I've seen.
I think at the end of the day universal recognition is most important Any boxing fan who knows the weightclasses pretty well can easily decipher who the man at the weight is despite the hardware situation When Wlad beat Peter in 2005 I think most felt he was the man despite not having actually won a world title. Byrd was the best holder at the weight though nobody saw him as a threat It gets murky sometimes in a scenario like lightweight in the mid 2000's where Casamayor had the Ring belt but Juan Diaz unified 3 belts. Who was champ? Though if you want to laugh Katsidis had the WBO interim and walked in second and was announced second vs Casamayor when he was Ring champ
Of not even tertiary importance...but still a million times more important than any of its nearest also-rans (like the IBO, WBF, etc)
Yes. Two or three belts = unified. All four = undisputed. Not that the sanctioning bodies aren't as corrupt as Rod Blagojevich, because they are.