Do you think this wood improve the sport

It sounds crazy, maybe, I just feel the sport needs to move faster for it to be successful. The more a fighter fights, the more people know of him. They also have a better gage as to how impressive or how unimpressive a fighter is. It builds bigger fights, gets more money, would get more exposure to the undercard and overall helps the sport. The Soup belts shouldn't even be thought of. There should be two belts per divison. And for big events, the titles can be unified. The reason for this is simple. If a champion is TRULY great, he'll eventually have both titles. Let's say he retires or vacates the titles though. There then are two champions. This way we double the chances of finding a worthy champion to fill the void. Because once both titles are won, they should be forced to defend against eachother. This concept would have more division tournements, which means the cream of the crop would rise much faster, and we'd get better fights, more often then not. There should be a top ten for only one title. But the top four would fight in two matches once the title was vacate, for whatever reason. Then the winners fight eachother to determine the unified champion. The way the champion should defend is as follows (in my personal opinion.) His first defense can be against anyone. Then he must face his mandotory. And so on, and so forth. In terms of fees. Fighters should not pay fees. The organization that would run this should get an overall percentage from the gate, buyrate, and advertisements. As well as whatever the casino is willing to pay. That money can be used to advertise big fights, and earn more exposure. Also, it can go to benefit a fighter or his family if a ring death/accident occurs. That's of course, only going to happen in my perfect little world. great plan

Never thought of placing 19 of the top 20 in a hat and pulling them out to see who gets a title shot, really the prob is down to managers and promoters who want to protect their fighters and make as much money as poss from the gullible public. how is it that only the heavyweight's go to court if they don't get thier title shots

I think that bringing wood into boxing would make it much more violent and create much higher injuries. Petition to NOT bring wood into boxing signed Besides, pirates might start boxing then. LOL.. Dumbest post ever.

I think that bringing wood into boxing would make it much more violent and create much higher injuries. Petition to NOT bring wood into boxing signed Besides, pirates might start boxing then.

It sounds crazy, maybe, I just feel the sport needs to move faster for it to be successful. The more a fighter fights, the more people know of him. They also have a better gage as to how impressive or how unimpressive a fighter is. It builds bigger fights, gets more money, would get more exposure to the undercard and overall helps the sport. The Soup belts shouldn't even be thought of. There should be two belts per divison. And for big events, the titles can be unified. The reason for this is simple. If a champion is TRULY great, he'll eventually have both titles. Let's say he retires or vacates the titles though. There then are two champions. This way we double the chances of finding a worthy champion to fill the void. Because once both titles are won, they should be forced to defend against eachother. This concept would have more division tournements, which means the cream of the crop would rise much faster, and we'd get better fights, more often then not. There should be a top ten for only one title. But the top four would fight in two matches once the title was vacate, for whatever reason. Then the winners fight eachother to determine the unified champion. The way the champion should defend is as follows (in my personal opinion.) His first defense can be against anyone. Then he must face his mandotory. And so on, and so forth. In terms of fees. Fighters should not pay fees. The organization that would run this should get an overall percentage from the gate, buyrate, and advertisements. As well as whatever the casino is willing to pay. That money can be used to advertise big fights, and earn more exposure. Also, it can go to benefit a fighter or his family if a ring death/accident occurs. That's of course, only going to happen in my perfect little world.

The voluntaries is where the good fights take place, so I don't understand this.

What kind of wood are you talking about?

What is needed is a centralised matchmaking system, based around one set of ranking and one champion in each weight class. Of course this won't happen, as it means no place for the existing sanctioning bodies. Ironic really, given that the organisers of UFC will be raking in more money that the boxing sanctioning bodies combined soon.... I hate people getting title shots without beating a single top 20 opponent in the fans eyes. If you're good enough, then you should be able to take the risk of beating the good to get a shot at the best.

For this to work there would need to be one legit champion of the world that was not beholden to financial influence from the likes of Don King et al. Unfortunately the boxing bodies are no longer bound by the traditions in which they were created (unlike, for example, Wimbledon, which would not accept bribes for seeding in case it destroyed their prestige) so I can't see them having any problems accepting payments from interested parties.

or give each champ a min number of voluntary defences they can have

Unfortunately this very concept has been willfully abused by sanctioning bodies who accepted payments in return for rankings by promoters. The IBF was indicted for doing so and if you take a look at the top ten of any organisation and any weight class you'll see more than one "WTF?" fighter in their top ten. A better system would be a seeding system similar to the one used in tennis, but to implement this we would need to ditch the silly notion that one loss means that a fighter is "shot".