What titles do you rate and what ones do you regard as meaningless?

Witter hasnt got a British Title for keeps, he only has ever had 2 British Title fights.

I thought you had to make 3 defenses of the British Title to have one for keeps and Beeston pointed out it wasnt like that in Lewis's day and I didnt know that.

 

Witter won the title outright after only three rounds because of the 'three years no challengers rule'.
Magri won the belt outright, and he only ever contested in one British title fight.

 

I think its 3 wins in British title fights, not defences.

 

That was the case prior to September 1999. Since then it's been four wins required to win the belt outright (draws don't count as successful defences).

 

:good Cheers.

I guess the BBBof C are trying to save money. Since when isn't a draw a successful defence?

 

Never heard of that but thanks for clarifying the rule mate.

 

Stupid isn't it?
I also think it's also unfair that fighters are no longer able to win more than one Lonsdale outright per weight class. With the average level of activity of todays fighter, how many are actually in a position to win more than the one belt? At best they've denied a handful of fighters and saved a minimal amount of dosh.
Today I outside of Rhodes, Moore and Williams I can't think of anybody else who would be conceivably close to winning more than the one outright in the same weight class. And even then, Moore's moved up to middle now.

 

The British title is the tops. so much tradition and i think it needs to be restored to its former glory and we need to start putting more emphasize on it amd make it prestigious again, this way its more appealing to the networks, fighters/promoters and then maybe a british title fight starts selling.

As for the world title I don't recognise and consider meaningless anyone who is a paper champ (Khan, Haye etc) Basically anyone who hasn't beaten a lineal champ or at least the best in a particular division. Same goes for the Euro title, which is along with the British and a 'proper' world that i respect. Any other one like the commonwealth, Area etc i consider pretty meaningless.

 

Surely that logic should apply to the British title as well.
Quite a few British champs in recent years couldn't claim to be the best domestically.

 

Goes without saying Olly, but there's not 4 or 5 versions of it.

 

There aren't numerous versions of the British title, but the Commonwealth belt has been used to keep fighters from the same stable apart (Barker & Elcock), much as the same way ABC world titles can not enforce unifications between the various belt holders.
There have also been situations where the British champ may have been inferior to the Commonwealth champ as possibly was the case with Thaxton/Murray & Khan.
Not to mention the problem that can occur with only acknowledging lineal champs.

 

Therein lies the problem.

Given that Austalia, Canada etc are in the Commonwealth.... and that very few of their fighters bother with the title it's sort of become an interim British title in all but name, the only difference being that Africans are eligible.

They ought to let the title fade away gracefully rather than devaluing it any further.

 

jesus...i have always loved the british title, there have been so many classic battles and the lonsdale belt has been surrounded by folklore over the years..
robbie regan v francis ampofo is playing back in my head right now..

 

British title is probably the most important step for a British fighter with world title aspirations , if you cant clear out GB then forget the world , so thats an imperative belt for me .

Outside of that :

The Ring , WBC , IBF , WBA , WBO

Other than that im not interested .

 

Manny Pacquaio vs Floyd Mayweather will probably be for an IBO International belt as was, if my memory serves me correct, Manny versus Morrales. Therefore **** belts can sometimes be fought over by great fighters. However, the fact remains that the belt is pointless...

Domestically I only respect the following,

Area,
National (English, Celtic),
British,
Commonwealth (though that is changing fast with some of the **** opponents that have been found).

Internationally only the EBU and NABO are worthy of any respect. All other continental belts are pointless and a laughing stock. (In Africa, for example, guys can fight for the ABU title in their debut or against fighters with 0-4 records).

World titles are a problem. The WBC, WBA, IBF and WBO all have their documented problems but as long as they exist they should be respected though not revered. However, The Ring Championship belt IS the World Title and should be venerated.