When did we stop having one world champion

Boxing splintered into different organizations and each wanted their own equal slice of the pie, so they created individual titles.

Wikipedia could give you a more detailed explanation and dates.

 

The situation began in the mid to late 1960s, when the WBA and the WBC began to sponsor their own world champions. At first it was only a few weight classes that were split between the organizations, not all.

By the early to mid 1970s, however, almost every weight class was split between the WBA and the WBC. The reaction in the media and among the fans was very negative. The split title system was regarded as a farce...something that was ruining boxing. Most people wanted a return to the single champion per weight class system.

But it didn't happen. In 1983, a third organization -- the IBF -- entered the picture. Late in the 1980s the WBO became a force as well.

Now, having just the WBC and the WBA seems like an ideal, long forgotten solution to boxing's political problems. Funny.

 

Yep, I agree that by the mid 70s it was all becoming a mess. Looking back, I can see my interest in boxing going into a steep decline about that point.

Now I'm somewhat interested again, but boxing would be so much better off with one accepted ranking system and one champion per weight class.

 

The fans can change it back. It is all about recognition. Just stop recognizing all the titlists as champion. Pick one and go with it. Make fun of people claiming to be fighting for world titles when they are merely titlists.

Wladamir has beaten Peter, Byrd, and Ibragamov. He may not be headed for the hall of fame with those wins, but it is enough to claim to be the man at above 200 lbs. Anyone else wanting to be champ needs to go through Wlad, or build a better resume. If a heavyweight wins a belt without doing the aforementioned don't recognize them as anything other than a contender.

Beaten Peter. I can't help it, but that makes me laugh. I'm childish and I drink a lot. Sue me.

I hate to be redundant, but recognition is everything.

 

Well there has always been split titles to some degree. I mean abck at the beginning we had the Coloured HW Championship alongside the commonly accepted Championship but both titles were as valid as one another when you look back now.

 

Was it on a Tuesday. I think it was on a Tuesday. I mean, I really have no idea, but if I had to guess, I'd say Tuesday.

 

Why? Because if you can bill a fight as a championship bout, everyone makes more money, though it doesn't mean nearly as much of course. Eight weight classes, one organization, one champ in each division, some things are better left untouched. You agree?

 

It was the 60's I think, although there were instances of multiple champs in single weight divisions before that

 

Always have been split titles depending on the time, and division, generally around the mid-to-late 60's.

 

the WBA-WBC thing started in the late-60s but IMO classic boxing wasn't 'destroyed' until the late 80's. Four or five champs in each division? Top 10 contenders suddenly went from 10 to 40+???? by the mid-90's Give me a *&^%% break, I remember going to the barber shop with my dad in the early 60's and knowing every champ and every contender. It's why this piece of crap UFC nonsense is now flourishing. If it wasn't for the Classic Forum, I wouldn't even visit this site. My $0.02

 

:good that basically spells it out, and the feelings & emotions about it too.

yes also to whomever said Don't recognise them, I don't recognise ANY of them at all, I only recognise honest talented fighters who have fought and earned there way to a position, many of the rest of them aren't even contenders in the true meaning of the privileged definition of a contender!

 

When there was a Color Line keeping cirtan boxers from winning a championship the championship was split. When the NYSA championship was a ligit championship. The championship was split. When the alphabets emerged the championships were split.
Basicaly split championships are not a new thing by any means.

 

We still get the odd 'true' champion, although it is clear we are getting less and less of them. Until the IBF came along it was not a huge issue, but since things have not gone so well.

For those who point out that multiple champions were not unusual, they have a point. But for a short period in the late 1940's there was never 'only' eight generally recognized champions in 'only' the classic eight divisions.

 

yes, but now they are as prolific as a team of sled dogs broke loose and pulling their own sleds... a house, far, far too divided!