Should boxing just have 1 belt per division?

[Canadian Kid]

Man there are billions of different belts people are able to win. If it was up to me they would get rid of all of em and just have ONE belt. Cuz man it gets confusing and 90% of the fighters are CHAMPIONS ...... Ive had casual fans tell me that its confusing. Dana White knows this, thats why he has 1 belt / division







Then everyone wont be ducking eachother

[The Comedian]

I say limit it to two belts, that way we can still have to champions come together and unify. I think we should page out of the book from UFC and have less weigh classes.

[Dambala]

It's very annoying to have all those ******s meaningless belts, I'm okay with 3 major belts and the Ring because I like unifications but I wouldn't mind to see one belt per division.

[Thread Stealer]

I'd like it better, surely.

Then everyone wont be ducking eachother

That wouldn't change. In fact, the high-risk/low-reward fighters would get screwed over even more. Back in the days, with less titles to choose from, some great fighters never got title shots, or waited way way too long for them.

Now, they have more to choose from, and can use that belt as a negotiating tool.

[Canadian Kid]

I say limit it to two belts, that way we can still have to champions come together and unify. I think we should page out of the book from UFC and have less weigh classes.

I agree about the weight classes. Cut em down to 8 or 9 instead of 17

[Spray_resistant]

I know alot of ppl disagree with me on here about this issue, but how the sport is run now with all of the promotional cronyism I think the belts really help obscure fighters get some notoriety that they otherwise would not.

Martinez for example without winning an interim vacant title would not be in the position he is in now I am convinced.

If they could make 1 universal governing body in boxing like a league I would support 1 belt per division but right now its just not fair to fighters who do not have the favor of the right promoters.

[DIB42]

I say limit it to two belts, that way we can still have to champions come together and unify. .

Thats the sort of logic that leads to having 1032843274923 belts.... HAVE THEM UNIFY!!! ..

No!

have the #1 contender actually mean something...

1 belt per division

/thread

[-EX-]

It would be good but wouldn't happen...I'd be satisfied if there were just 2 instead of 3-4...

And they should scrap the NABO and all them otha BS belts...

[cooper5]

It should have one belt and the sanctioning bodies should be put back in the toilet! Titles are so cheapened and fighters hide behind their belts from the other belt holders. How can anyone really be a champion when there are three other people claiming the same thing.

[Thread Stealer]

Throughout most of history boxing has had two belts out there that were more or less respected and recognized. Most of the time, at least for the first half of the 20th century, one guy had both belts, but there's usually been at least two titles at there.

I'd settle for that, instead of the "Big 4". This is boxing, not accounting firms.