Opinion: Undisputed is bad for the boxers and bad for fans

I agree.

There’s too many organisations.

Which means that there’s too many mandatories.

And most fighters are only fighting 2-3 times per year.

So in effect, they’re holding the belts hostage.

But the alternative?

You then have multiple champs in the same division, where people then demand unification/undisputed match ups. And rightly so.

Basically, it’s a no win situation.

Nobody wants to see anybody get hurt. But they should be fighting more often. But then who are we to tell them that?

It’s a nightmare situation.

In an ideal world, there’d be less organisations, and the fighters would be fighting 3-4 times per year.

Also, what’s with some of these camps?

Some of the camps today, are 10-12 week camps.

I don’t care what anyone says, the sport as a whole has been diluted.

 

as a fan, I like the idea of unifying the division to create an undisputed champ, it in theory seperates one fight champions from the real deal. but...i do agree it creates a lot more issues. a large list of mandatories that deserve there shot, every organisations involved now taking a cut etc. Also an undisputed run opens you up to be defeated by a one fight champion that makes the glamour of being undisputed fade a bit. Leon Spinks & Douglas had good nights but fighters of there generation they are not.

So to keep it short. my 2 cents is...make undisputed sure, but maintaining it and trying to go on a undisputed run afterwards is a pain not worth having. Lewis was still undoubtly #1 after he got stripped, as is Usyk.

 

Just make rules that unified champs and undisputed champs also have unified and undisputed mandatories and this issue seems solved.

 

It’s definitely bad for boxing as it kills the excitement, it is the peak of the orgasm that fans crave, and ones it’s over….well fans not interested any longer.

there is some sense in letting fights marinate etc too. You need build up etc.

 

It's fun when the belts are scattered and you watch one fighter collect them all. Current example going on -- Bam. Final one for 115 will be Willibardo Garcia. Bam will immediately vacate them all once he gets it to move up to 118. So, no harm here. If he DID sit on them, yeah, that would get boring, because unless there's some young prospect I'm not aware of, only getting old would finally dethrone him at 115.

Perhaps this means undisputed is fine for the little guys?

 

My rule idea:

Any world title holder can issue a challenge to another other in his division, which immediately make him the other guy's mandatory. Mandated purse split of 40/40, with the remaining 20 going to the winner. If the the guy being challenged refuses the fight, he's immediately stripped, the belt becomes vacant, and the challenger gets to fight the #1 in that sanctioning body's rankings for the belt.

Then add in undisputed and unified mandatories. NO voluntary defenses for them, only mandatories.

Do it this way, the problem is 100% fixed.

 

The only change id put in here is voluntaries are allowed if there is no mandatory or they have just completed their mandatory (6 month timetable?), I haven't thought out the details but that would keep things flowing and allow for less rigid title defenses especially if there are injuries or we are in between mandatories

 

Don’t we hate several “world championship@ belts anyway? Why do we want to see them all defended individually?

Undisputed isn’t a problem at all. But fighting once a year is, which has been the case for 2 best fighters in the world for the decade since the pandemic.

 

There is zero reason to actually hold onto the belts when you are undisputed. You can drop 3 and still be a champion. The achievement is in winning them all not holding onto them.

 

I agree with you. The people wanting 1 belt are misunderstanding boxings core issues.

 

This let the mandatorys fight each other to earn a shot at the champ

 

Yep!

 

The problem is the number of belts. Not someone wanting to collect them all.

 

In theory we have a fairly good system with the orgs ranking the opponents , calling out mandatory defences and stripping champions for inactivity .

In practice we have a "pay to win" system where all you need ( beyond a decent athlete) is a powerful investor supplying money to pay the orgs exceptionally well and out of a sudden the champ he is accepted to sit on the belts without being stripped or gets really soft touches served by omitting the true opponents .

The problem is imho not the multi belt era , the problem are the orgs who accept to pave an easy way to victory for a premium fee .