One of the main problems with boxing today...

People have been sayin this for ages. Best example of sayin **** it is Tarver-Johnson 1. If more fighters would shit on the alphabet belts and just concentrate on fightin the best opponents, boxing would be better off.

I guess that would be my one main complaint about boxing. Is way to many belts. And it would deffinatly make the champs fight the best.

It would be too hard to have one belt for each division due to the politics of those bodies, but at least they should get rid of that "interim, intercontinental, emritus B.S. and just have 3 mayor belts.

I think two belts is enough, the amount of belts and weight divisions is ridiculous. Two champions gain there titles, then fight each other to unify.

The sad fact is we all tend to contribute to the problems with boxing. For example, most of us have hailed George Foreman as the oldest Heavyweight champion, but is it true? Was he the undisputed champion? Did he make any effort to clean out the division? There is no shortage of guys who claim that Foreman was ducking them. The truth is Foreman, in his second incarnation, was nothing more than a belt holder just like Valuev.

there should be one single world championship per weight division, this needs to come into affect ASAP, it isnt right when we have a valuev as world champ, 1 single title belt, 1 single champion, it would clean this whole mess up, and fighters would have to work even harder to become world champion - which means only the best will be world champ.

bloody hell daggum you must be the most anti calzaghe boo boy on these forums - and thats saying something. joe touched on it and hes right, for instance when comparing fighters of today with fighters of yesterday its hard because of the fact that todays champs are often accused of avoiding fights with certain ppl or of not being champs at all. are calzaghes or hopkins title defenses really worthy of mentioning in the same breath as say someone like joe louis? imo its the ring belt that is worth looking at first, then the WBC belt and then the others. i think if you're a chmp you should take on the hardest fights, thats the whole point of being a champion. i hear some ppl saying that fighters like vasquex or marg deserve a slightly easier fight after their respective wars vs cotto and marquez. but i can't help but think thats flawed thinking, the whole point of being a champ is that you are the number 1 and you have to fend off every challenge from every comer.

I agree with you. Actualy, Calzaghe also touched on this same point and got shot down in flames a while back. Obviously there are too many sanctioning bodies, belts, etc. There's like 40 world champs nowadays. Retarded. i wonder why? he called himself world champ for ten years while holding a garbage wbo belt and fighting infantile retards. he's such a thick-headed dolt he doesn't even realize how stupid he made himself look with those idiotic comments.

The problem will never be solved... The best that we can ask for is that the networks call people with belts... beltholders and not champs. Until you win the Ring Belt... you should never be called champ.

i meant the way they rank champions sorry

I think everybody would agree that one of the main problems with the sport today is the ridiculous amount of world titles at each weight, too many boxers can call themselves a "World Champion" (Valuev? WTF). Anyways do you think this problem will ever be resolved? and how do you guys think it should happen? personally i think The Ring have the right idea... I agree with you. Actualy, Calzaghe also touched on this same point and got shot down in flames a while back. Obviously there are too many sanctioning bodies, belts, etc. There's like 40 world champs nowadays. Retarded. 100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

The Ring never forces a fight, but the idea of a single belt is definately a start.