which 'world title' means has the least credibility?

I would say WBO but that doesn't even count as a world title

 

Unifying titles would mean something if once a fighter did it, they would fold the belts. No, instead each organization keeps on going with their racket.

 

Can you explain why the ring magazine is more valuable?

Are there so many bad fighters member of the WBO-organization then?

 

Wbo

 

Here are my rankings

1. WBC(the official belt)

2. WBA(the origional belt)

3. IBF(kind of shaddy, but still has decent cred.)

4. WBO( The belt of choice for guys who aren't quite good enough and
British SMW's)

I don't really rank the Ring belt, they're just a magazine.

 

WBC is a sham belt.

"Please Pacquiao fight for one of our belts so we can gain some credibility."