THE WBA - Why Can't They Have Just One Recognised World Champion?

Why is it that the WBA has so many champions in one division?

The new WBA farce is the Andreas Kotelnik/Marcos Maidana stance. All credit to Maidana, but fighting Ortiz for the Interim title? I thought Interim champions were for the current holders who were injured or inactive?? Last time I looked Kotelnik is making a sanctioned defence against Khan, doesnt that make him the champion still. I mean WTF!!! - Maidana should really be referred to as the No1 Contender, not 'interim' champion

Another WBA screw up is the Ruslan Chagaev/Nikolay Valuev saga. Chageav has been forced out of numerous defences as champion, most recently against Valuev. Detractors will say the hepatitis incident was the Finnish Authorities being too strict but if the boxer isn't fit to defend after numerous chances then in this case its a no brainer that Valuev should be the champion outright.

Another incident is now the 3 champions situation in the Super Bantamweight Division. DOUBLE WTF?? THREE CHAMPIONS??? My fair question to the WBA is - 'ok, benefit of the doubt - have an interim champion - BUT WHY DO YOU NEED TWO'?

Maybe im just plain stupid when it comes to the WBA way of thinking, but in most cases you assume that the world champion is the one who has defeated the previous champion - holder of that organisations belt.

Please tell me if im insane or just don't understand boxing...PLEASE WBA - WHO ARE YOUR RECOGNISED CHAMPIONS??

 

It just seems then its an utterly ******ed system having more than one recognised champ - maybe straight and to the point that is about the cash then. Kind of ruins any prestige of carrying their belt if there is several owners.