IBF North American heavyweight title WBO International heavyweight title WBA Inter-Continental heavyweight title Would quite like to see a unification of these belts.
Dude, Dont even know what fighters are ranked for those titles. Never kept up with those organizations. Keeping up with the main four is hard enough.
It use to be in this order: 1. WBC 2. WBA 3. IBF 4. WBO Now they are all the same... a disgrace. But WBC has the most quality history. In fact, there was a time when the WBO was sort of like the IBO, but they managed to become relevant.
1. IBF 2. WBO 3. WBA 4. WBC The WBA give titles out like candy whilst the WBC have found fake titles, silver titles, temporary titles and seem to refuse any fighter to unify (unless persuaded with some dinero) WBO and IBF are far from perfect however theyve shown the least corruption. I have the IBF on top purely for the fact that theyve organised a decent tournament at heavyweight with the WBO slightly behind on the pedigree of their own fighters (Wladimir, Huck, Pacquiao, Bradley, Marquez, Donaire etc.) the WBA and WBC are the two oldest yet are the worst. we need to have on fair sanctioning body in the sport
Amazing how it has changed with time. The WBO wasn't relevant and the IBF was the least relevent of the original 3.
The fighter makes the belt to a degree. James toney repeats this incessantly to justify his iba and now ibu titles. I think he is right and let's say, for arguments sake, he went on a winning run beating all the top ten except the K bros all the while defending his ibu title that belt, by being associated with him, would be better regarded than it is now. To answer the question i think the wba is a solid 4th place, devalued with too many interim, ordinary and super champs. I still tend to think of wbc as the top one but the ibf is closing the gap as it avoids having platinum and diamante champs...
