Originally posted by Skittlez
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Lennox Lewis 'there should only be one belt in each division' but is it actually good
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by -Jay- View PostIn this day and age fighters don't fight frequently enough for there to only be one belt. We'd see two championship fights in each division a year if we were lucky.
If your coming from the perspective of non title fights only being 10 rounds, then adjust it, according to the fight. If it's a main event/headliner fight, make it a 12 rounder.
Comment
-
Originally posted by kiaba360 View Postumm...he isn't a 3 weight champion lol
The point of having multiple titles is so that all the countries in the world have a realistic chance of becoming a champion. Multiple titles seem to be a result of politics, not a symptom. One title would do away with the concept of "lineal champion".
Champion: Martinez
#1 Golovkin
#2 Pirog
#3 Geale
#4 Chavez
#5 Sturm
#6 Quillin
#7 Macklin
#8 Murray
#9 Mundine
#10 Taylor
Then Martinez has to fight Golovkin, and so on and so forth and the ranking wouldno longer be a favoritism contest by organisations but a list of legitimate threats to a title. Imagine if Floyd just went down the list of WBA's top 10 ranked junior middleweights now, it would be embarrassing. Trout holds the regular WBA title, Floyd holds the super title and after that the top10 consists of #2 Cotto, #5 Lara and then no one else of note.
Comment
-
Originally posted by -Jay- View PostIn this day and age fighters don't fight frequently enough for there to only be one belt. We'd see two championship fights in each division a year if we were lucky.
Despite what people think of the UFC they constantly match up the best fighters in each division which is why it's popularity grew so quickly. If Boxing could do that again it would be huge.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ryn0 View PostImagine what the middleweight division would look like now if there was one belt
Champion: Martinez
#1 Golovkin
#2 Pirog
#3 Geale
#4 Chavez
#5 Sturm
#6 Quillin
#7 Macklin
#8 Murray
#9 Mundine
#10 Taylor
Then Martinez has to fight Golovkin, and so on and so forth and the ranking wouldno longer be a favoritism contest by organisations but a list of legitimate threats to a title. Imagine if Floyd just went down the list of WBA's top 10 ranked junior middleweights now, it would be embarrassing. Trout holds the regular WBA title, Floyd holds the super title and after that the top10 consists of #2 Cotto, #5 Lara and then no one else of note.
I also think it would eliminate a lot of nut hugging, and give some more fighters exposure, and fans. Since he would be looked upon as the undisputed best of that division. Fans would have no choice, but to respect his skills, and watch his next fight.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ryn0 View PostImagine what the middleweight division would look like now if there was one belt
Champion: Martinez
#1 Golovkin
#2 Pirog
#3 Geale
#4 Chavez
#5 Sturm
#6 Quillin
#7 Macklin
#8 Murray
#9 Mundine
#10 Taylor
Then Martinez has to fight Golovkin, and so on and so forth and the ranking wouldno longer be a favoritism contest by organisations but a list of legitimate threats to a title. Imagine if Floyd just went down the list of WBA's top 10 ranked junior middleweights now, it would be embarrassing. Trout holds the regular WBA title, Floyd holds the super title and after that the top10 consists of #2 Cotto, #5 Lara and then no one else of note.
Comment
-
Originally posted by kiaba360 View PostWould the champion automatically vacate in cases of injuries? If so, does he get bumped to the front of the line when he's healthy again, or does he have to fight the current #1 contender to get a title shot again? I feel that having one belt offers a lot of benefits. There'd be no more cherry-picking and guys wouldn't be able to jump weight-classes and jump to the front of the line for a title shot. I just don't know how easy it would be to implement. What role would the networks play? This kind of system would also allow champions to exploit their back-yard advantage, unless there's incentive for them to travel.
Comment
-
It would be better to have one champion per division, but the WBA, WBC, IBF and WBO already exist. They would have to join together somehow (not happening). The ring only gives out a belt in a #1 vs. #2 match-up or you beat the champ.
If boxing went back to 15 round fights and one champ per division the sport would benefit.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ryn0 View PostIt would be much better if it was just one, then there would be no way of ducking and dodging the best.
And mandatories would become worth something again, there would be way less 3 division champions like Fernando Guerrero (who isn't a bad fighter btw). There would be no easy way to a title in a division either.
Comment
Comment