When did we stop having one world champion

regardless of belts I think the media and TV should cast more exposure on three things.

#1, who has the closest to a linear claim (historians could work this out)

#2, who is the best at the weight. (At any one time most people know what fight can be made to determine this.)

#3, stop advertising minor belt holders as "champion".

If fights like #2 are not made then there is no champion. and it should be reported as such. The media should "say so and so belt holder is not a champion, title is vacant". Then it would force promoters to deliver real champions again. TV channels should be stopped from advertising minor titles as world championship fights.

It should always be clear that there are belt holders but not champions. If a recognised champion of the people(linear, best in the weight) under this system avoids his outstanding contender for a year he is relegated to mere belt holder or ex champion.

4 Belts are good because they can be used to determine the top four contenders.

There should be a law in place to stop each body saying they are all producing a real world champion if there is only one world.

 

#1 Sometimes even 'historians' cannot agree.

#2 Who defines this? TV executives, Journalists even 'historians', they will all have their own agenda, that may bias their opinion.

#3 If you are unable to get the big names, but can make money from the use of a minor belt, why not advertise it?

 

Any 'law' would be destroyed in a Court, we live in a capitalist society, you cannot expect to make rules like that. And an abstract term like 'real' is not going to prop such a rule.