Which World Title Is Most Worthless? IBF, WBC, IBO, WBO, WBA, The Ring?

wow!!! The answer is clearly the IBO. If all you have is an IBO title, the least amount of people are going to consider your fight a world championship match compared to just having one of the others or even Ring Magazine recognition (which some inexpeplicably still value despite it being owned by a promoter). The original poster loses a lot of credibility choosing the IBF because they either know absolutely nothing about the sport or live in a bizarro universe if they think an IBO championship is more lucrative than an IBF championship. Worse, the original poster's post is full of faulty logic and inaccuracies. The IBF had no choice but to strip Tyson Fury because the mandatory was OVERDUE and Fury had promised to face the mandatory next, only to secretly agree to a *voluntary* rematch clause. Charles Martin was given a year to face his mandatory AFTER BEATING THE MANDATORY!!! Had Fury beaten the IBF mandatory, he too would have been given a year. The IBF is *extremely* consistent with the enforcement of their rules, unlike any other sanctioning body. I believe if the original poster analyzed the facts without bias, they would come to a far different conclusion. Preach it bro! It's all the truth

Why even include the ibo. They don't even count towards being undisputed

This poll is corrupted. The WBO has only 6 votes when Ali and Vargas are fighting for the title at 147? In what world should the winner of that fight be a champion in the welterweight division?

Hard to believe people are actually picking WBA over IBO WBA is a garbage

IBO and The Ring equally!

IBO is totally useless. Obviously that. Then WBO.

Any title which has a regular, super, interim, champion emeritus, and champion in recess titleholder in its organization is a farce.

I actually didn't take into account the wording of the question in my votes. They're all pretty "worthless" to a degree, and if I could change my vote I would vote for all of them. I voted thinking of the stupid stuff some organizations have done recently, based on the stuff that's painfully obvious without trying to look for a fault. But yeah they all suck. I don't base the value of a champion on the letters of the belt he carries, but more so on who he beat and how he did it. For example, there's no doubt in my mind GGG is the best MW fighter in the world and should be considered the Champ at the division if it were not for stupid belt politics.

The IBO by a long shot.

I'm gonna skip the IBO but with regards to the other belts, it depends on the division, for example, at heavyweight the IBF means nothing. At welterweight, the WBA means nothing and at middleweight, any belt not owned by GGG and/or Canelo is useless.

They're all the same, it's the fighter that defines the champion. A champion will clear out the top contenders, where a title holder can simply hide behind the title.

original zero can continue to defend these scumbags, but the fact remains that what the IBF did to Fury is bad for boxing. They stripped a legitimate champion to create another paper champion. Fury should've filmed a video of him dumping the belt in the toilet and curling one out on top of it.

After Klitschko & Fury promised the IBF that the winner would face their mandatory next, they secretly negotiated a voluntary rematch clause and hid the clause from the IBF to trick the IBF into sanctioning their first fight. Source for this info please? Also Glazkov is a nobody, they could've thrown some silencing cash at him which happens all the time in boxing.

IBF clearly. I wonder if those morons ever responded to all the criticsm regarding their brainfart when it came to handling the Tyson Fury situation.

The WBA 'Regular' is a joke of a belt.

We Be Crooks