~ 1. WBC- throughout the years, they have had the most legitimate champions but they have made some questionable decisions throughout the years, such as; the shortening of rounds from 15 to 12 (which was arguably a good thing), open scoring, their accidental foul rule in which the uninjured fighter loses a point even though the foul was accidental, their relationship with Don King, and their relationship with Mexican fighters since they are a Mexican-based sanctioning organization. ~ 2. WBA- they are the oldest sanctioning body and for the most part, their champions have been respectable, however just like the WBC, they have made some questionable decisions throughout the years such as; all of the interim titles, which are a way to get more sanctioning fees, all of the "super" titles which they state are created so that a unified champion doesn't have to make as many mandatory defenses but in reality, it was created so they could make more money off of sanctioning fees and I think the proof is that they have broken their own rules multiple times by giving "super" titles to fighters who don't own any other title (Shane Mosley at welterweight, Chris John at featherweight). ~ 3. IBF- they have Larry Holmes to thank for their legitimacy since they appointed him their inaugural champion after the WBC stripped Holmes, and since Holmes never lost in the ring, everyone excepted the IBF as a legitimate world title. Just like the WBA and WBC, their champions have been respectable for the most part but they too make very questionable decisions such as the way that they strip their fighters of their belts- the other sanctioning bodies are much more lenient when it comes to unification and optional bouts but the IBF has no problem stripping a fighter even if the fighter makes a plea to try and unify the title. Many of their mandatory challengers are also not worthy because their rankings are fairly questionable. ~ 4. WBO- they have not been around for that long and they didn't get acceptance as a legitimate world title until the late 1990s and early 2000s. For the past few years up until now, their champions have been legitimate but for the first decade of their existence, the champions that they recognized were not seen as legitimate, recognized world champions- the WBO was more of a fringe belt than an actual world title, meaning that if you had it, you were on your way to getting a shot at 1 of the other 3 world titles but now, the WBO has the same legitimacy that the other 3 have.
Regarding the heavyweight division and the alphabet organizations, here is how I rated them last year. http://www.eastsideboxing.com/news.php?p=24090&more=1 I'd be curious to hear some feedback on the breakdown and the criteria I used to rank them. :smoke
http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=165083 http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=352058
The WBC are the best because they have Julio Cesar Chavez Junior as their legit middleweight world champion. They're not even joking.
They'd lend a bit of credibility to themselves if they would include fellow titlists from their rival sanctioning bodies into their rankings, preferably with a #1 or 2 ranking if the other titlist had beaten more than 1 of their top 5 to win or in defense of his belt. There is really no excuse why Wladimir is not the #1 contender and mandatory for Vitali, and viceversa. It is ALWAYS the fighters choice if he wants to pursue a mandate or allow his mandate to be sidestepped. All sanctioning bodies allow their #1s to pass on shots and allow for a #2 or #3 to have an eminator, and in some case, they even appoint a new #1, but never dethrone the former if he maintains a good standing within their system. This irks me to the fullest, and is what allows titlists such as Ward to duck the Champion Bute, running and hiding within a tournament. Of course, if the rankings were to be properly adjusted, Bute would be the mandatory for the winner of the tournament, and the winner would have to vacate if he once again ducks away from Bute. Just using that as an example....there are better ones out there such as Bradely ducking Khan and May ducking Pac. Just using the most irritating one that I have.
IBF is quite solid they follow their rules but they suffer from rest who hand out all kind of belts to nearly every remotely decent contender so many turn IBF eliminators down, get off the rankings because the they've got some paper belt etc and so eliminator fights and eventually the mandatory challengers are often jokes but can't really blame the IBF..
Not by Peter Manfredo Jr he won't. The WBC will keep feeding him stiffs for as long as they can get away with it. The WBC are just as bad as all the others.
not soon enuf... WBC.... Jose Sulaiman is about as sketchy as they come... JCCjr has a belt and i cant believe they're sanctioning this sham fight w/ a past prime Manfredo jr, who was a B fighter at his prime lawlz they ensured the Lt. Middleweight belt was vacated, and they sanctioned the Pac/Margarito catchweight fight as a Title weight fight lawlz.... Just 4 months after that, THE SAME ****ING BELT was vacant & available for the Alvarez/Hatton fight!!! Isnt there suppose to be some sort of minimum grace period for the belt to be attached to the champion? Sham organization....
