I agree that having 4 belts per division (even more if you count the IBO, Ring Magazine, and Lineal title) is way too much but I was still never a big fan of having only one belt per division. I think there should be only two belts per division and the "lineal title" should always be connected to one of the belts. I'm always excited at the prospect of a unification fight and it does make the fight just that much bigger to me. Some fights are meh but having two champions come together in the ring is one of the things I look forward to most. What are your guys' thoughts on this? Do you want just one belt per division or what?
oh you see the problem Floyd was already a Lineal Welterweight champ by 2006. Pac was only a Super Feather back then.
fast forward to 2009 and little Pac had knocked out Cotto.... and someone didn't want particular testing...
Seems like Pac wasted Floyd's time all these years
Funny you bring up testing who was the one masking steroids with an IV . Floyd wanted no part of Manny In 2009 this was a away to back out of fighting a prime Manny
I have a panel of me myself and i who decides who is best boxer in each weight class. Ring, lineal and alphabet titles don't mean much to me. I like unification fights because even though the two boxers involved may not be the two best in the class they are usually among the best. A fight between them brings some clarity to how the best boxers in that weight class compare with each other. The best seldom fight the best these days unless a world title is at stake.
To many titles always for weak Champs and fighter avoiding the best man in the division , If there was only one Champ Floyd vs Manny would have happened in 2009 not 2015 when Manny was a shot fighter
Because most of us hate there being multiple championships floating around and a unification always means one less belt. Even in spite of that, I don't normally get excited for a unification unless i's between two top level guys, i.e. Thurman and Garcia.
Besides what has been already brought up, we then have the issue that we often have where the fighters do not fight fighters that hold a different belt but in which may be the best opponent.
That can't be it.
"I CAN'T WAIT for this unification to take place so we can have one less paper champ in the division! It's gonna be awesome!"
If they are a paper champ, than you most likely don't even recognize them as a champ anyways so that belt becomes kinda meaningless you know what I mean. Kinda like Adonis Stevenson right now. He's got the green belt. The most sough after belt there is but the WBC belt kinda doesn't even exist in the light-heavyweight division right now for me.
You're missing the point..
glad to see others got it
this :fing02:
That can't be it.
"I CAN'T WAIT for this unification to take place so we can have one less paper champ in the division! It's gonna be awesome!"
If they are a paper champ, than you most likely don't even recognize them as a champ anyways so that belt becomes kinda meaningless you know what I mean. Kinda like Adonis Stevenson right now. He's got the green belt. The most sough after belt there is but the WBC belt kinda doesn't even exist in the light-heavyweight division right now for me.
Yeah but not all the belt holders in unifications are paper champs. IDK but Thurman vs Spence with only Thurman holding the WBC/WBA and Spence holding nothing is a lot less intriguing to me than Thurman-Spence with Thurman as WBC/WBA champ and Spence as IBF champ. Even though it shouldn't be a lot less intriguing lol cuz its the fight that matters. Idk maybe I'm just being weird about it.