If we get a unified HW champion, what comes next?

In this day and age, being "Undisputed" isn't something that can be sustained long term. There's just too many conflicts, too many mandatories, and too many execs who want their slice of the pie. Assuming AJ becomes Undisputed, then had to fragment the belts, he'd have to choose between staying with the IBF if he wanted to stay consistent challenged by mandatories, as they seem to have the most legit guys. OR, switching to the WBC (or WBA), who are the most likely to offer him flexibility. The IBF has shown that even when their policies aren't popular, they stick to them. Firmly. The WBC has shown that they will bend over for anyone who gives them some extra greenbacks. The WBA couldn't organize a piss up in a brewery. And WBO...wild card.

Mandatories? I actually want to see all the HW fighting each other, Ortiz v Parker, Wilder v Parker, Whyte v Ortiz/Parker, Miller, Pedvetkin, Joshua etc in the mix

Idongo wasn't an acclaimed top level fighter. He definitely got his 10% worth. He would have never sniffed a million in a million years if it wasn't for the belts. But once you become undisputed, it's rarely worth it to keep paying. That's why it's so common for someone to ditch a belt or two to cut down on fees and mandatories. But mainly the mandatories because the extra 2% to keep an extra belt would be worth it to maintain more control over the division if it didn't come with an additional mandatory. I'll never blame a fighter for taking the biggest money fight, but this exposes one of boxing's biggest flaws. It's the wild west. Imagine if in any other sport the star could avoid facing who had earned the position in favor of facing whoever is more commercially appealing? The Cavaliers get upset by the 76ers and Golden State decides they're going to duck who had earned the position and just play LeBron anyway. This type of stuff happens in boxing all the time. It's toxic. I agree on Indongo, and what you said about fighters dropping belts was my original point once you’ve won the titles they no longer add that much value certainly not the 10% you have to pay. I think you only really need one belt to have control over the division providing you have beaten the other top level and relevant fighters. There are so many flaws in boxing, the sanctioning bodies are just as much a part of it though with their bogus rankings and meaningless intercontinental titles. It’d be like the 76ers upsetting the Cavs and then Golden State being mandated to face the Brooklyn Nets cause they beat some Euroleague team for some international title.😂😂 It is toxic, I agree.

Yeah after you unify you can drop! If it was me I would Drop all besides the WBC and WBA which are historically the most Prestigious Belts in Boxing I think both been around the Longest if I'm not mistaking so they been around the waste of the GREATS especially the WBC

Completely disagree about the fee’s, the belts honestly don’t add that much value to the acclaimed, top level fighters, certainly not 10% anyway. We’ll just agree to disagree on that one. Idongo wasn't an acclaimed top level fighter. He definitely got his 10% worth. He would have never sniffed a million in a million years if it wasn't for the belts. But once you become undisputed, it's rarely worth it to keep paying. That's why it's so common for someone to ditch a belt or two to cut down on fees and mandatories. But mainly the mandatories because the extra 2% to keep an extra belt would be worth it to maintain more control over the division if it didn't come with an additional mandatory. I think the fact that boxing is a business does make it very hard to keep belts unified, for arguments sake, say the WBA ordered the Povetkin mandatory for later this year and there are no possible extensions or anything, in this period Tyson Fury has come back and looks as good as he did previously and there is huge demand for AJ-Fury. You couldn’t blame AJ for vacating the WBA belt in order to take a harder, bigger and more valuable fight in Fury, in the same way you couldn’t blame Bradley for vacating the WBO belt to take a bigger, tougher and more valuable fight in Pacquiao. I'll never blame a fighter for taking the biggest money fight, but this exposes one of boxing's biggest flaws. It's the wild west. Imagine if in any other sport the star could avoid facing who had earned the position in favor of facing whoever is more commercially appealing? The Cavaliers get upset by the 76ers and Golden State decides they're going to duck who had earned the position and just play LeBron anyway. This type of stuff happens in boxing all the time. It's toxic.

Exorbitant is an opinion and I don't argue opinions. If you feel it's exorbitant, I respect your view. But the 10% each guy paid out to the alphabelts was a worthwhile investment. Idongo made the biggest money of his life specifically because all of the belts were at stake. 10% well spent. Of course. Which is why the belts do't stay unified. Not because it's hard to keep them unified, but because it's harder to remain champion if you keep them unified. Guys like Klitschko and GGG put sport before business and wanted to accumulate the belts, even if it would have been safer to stick with one or two. More power to them. Completely disagree about the fee’s, the belts honestly don’t add that much value to the acclaimed, top level fighters, certainly not 10% anyway. We’ll just agree to disagree on that one. I think the fact that boxing is a business does make it very hard to keep belts unified, for arguments sake, say the WBA ordered the Povetkin mandatory for later this year and there are no possible extensions or anything, in this period Tyson Fury has come back and looks as good as he did previously and there is huge demand for AJ-Fury. You couldn’t blame AJ for vacating the WBA belt in order to take a harder, bigger and more valuable fight in Fury, in the same way you couldn’t blame Bradley for vacating the WBO belt to take a bigger, tougher and more valuable fight in Pacquiao. In an ideal world, we’d want the titles to remain unified but in many situations it is not pragmatic, hence the reason it’s has happened incredibly rarely during this 4 belt era.

Undisputed from heavy vs undisputed from cruiser. Seems legit to me :)

I would love to see the winner of Usyk/Gassiev move up to heavyweight and fight the undisputed champ. That would be pretty exciting. Usyk is 31 and Gassiev will be 25 in October, so if Usyk wins (he's the rightful favorite I would say) it needs to happen, ASAP. On the other hand, Gassiev could possibly continue to improve and we could see him as a legitimate threat at heavyweight.

My mistake then, lol. Still doesn't change the point I was making; with the last currently owed mandatory out of the way with a Povetkin fight, there's no reason for the undisputed heavyweight championship to be broken apart because of the owed mandatory defenses all basically lined up to be orderly handled for at least the next two years for whoever emerges with all of the belts after Wilder-Joshua is settled. blah blah blah.... ovetkin gets the WBA done, and the WBO. We still have an IBF to be called at the end of the year, which will be Whyte or Pulev..... 2 years? What are you even talking about?

Wladimir was able to keep 3 belts with two fights a year. Fighting three times a year is enough. Furthermore, sometimes a fighter can be mando to more than a belt as it is the case with Povetkin right now. With good management they can make it happen more times

Imagine writing all that and then realising that it's the WBA mandatory being forced (Povetkin is the #1 in the WBA and WBO, but the WBO was called last year, Parker fought Fury before Joshua)....... Oops... My mistake then, lol. Still doesn't change the point I was making; with the last currently owed mandatory out of the way with a Povetkin fight, there's no reason for the undisputed heavyweight championship to be broken apart because of the owed mandatory defenses all basically lined up to be orderly handled for at least the next two years for whoever emerges with all of the belts after Wilder-Joshua is settled.

The sanctioning fee’s are exorbitant there’s no debating that. https://www.boxingscene.com/crawford-indongo-pay-over-100k-apiece-sanctioning-fees--119327 Exorbitant is an opinion and I don't argue opinions. If you feel it's exorbitant, I respect your view. But the 10% each guy paid out to the alphabelts was a worthwhile investment. Idongo made the biggest money of his life specifically because all of the belts were at stake. 10% well spent. Boxing is a business and it all comes down to money. Of course. Which is why the belts do't stay unified. Not because it's hard to keep them unified, but because it's harder to remain champion if you keep them unified. Guys like Klitschko and GGG put sport before business and wanted to accumulate the belts, even if it would have been safer to stick with one or two. More power to them.

Yeah sorry my mistake, should've read undisputed. I can think of a couple of reasons. Primarily because it ties your hands somewhat. You're depending on the orgs delivering you the right opponents and sometimes they don't. With so many belts you're effectively on a mandatory only track. Which may stop you taking lucrative fights that help move your career along in a better direction. For example, AJ may want to take on a Chinese fighter in order to grow his brand in Asia or take a domestic money spinner like Haye. I also think if you release some of the belts and let others fight for them you build your eventual fight with them also... AJ can still make voluntary defences, like Wlad did before him but the advantage of having all the belts is that he can fight all the top guys. I can't imagine a big enough money spinner not rated by Ring, WBA, WBC, IBF or WBO.

All excuses fighters use to justify ditching belts when the truth is that they don't want to have to go in tough every fight. Keeping the belts unified is easy. The problem is that you might lose and now someone else has the unified belts and not you. The sanctioning fees are overstated. The orgs have fee caps, you can negotiate even lower, and some orgs take a lower percentage when you're unified. The belts don't stay unified because the fighters don't want to lose. Plain and simple. We had a nice stretch in the 80s and 90s with a series of undisputed heavyweight champions, but the title was a hot potato because everyone was going in tough and the title only splintered because Bowe blatantly ducked Lewis. Would have been easy to keep the belts together. Wouldn't have been easy to beat Lewis. Big difference. The sanctioning fee’s are exorbitant there’s no debating that. https://www.boxingscene.com/crawford-indongo-pay-over-100k-apiece-sanctioning-fees--119327 Boxing is a business and it all comes down to money. A lot of fighters vacate belts to either increase the percentage they take home from their purse or to seek greater financial opportunities. A modern example of this is Tim Bradley vacating his WBO title in order to have a third fight with Pacquiao. There are other situations where a fighter vacates a title to seemingly avoid a mandatory or challenger like the Bowe WBC saga, but this again also inviolved financial reasons as well. Bowe wanted ridiculously overpaying for the Lewis fight, Lewis’ team and the WBC did not agree with his demands so he threw it in the trash... Lewis even found himself in a comparable situation when he vacated the IBF title cause he was looking for more favourable pay days. (Plus Don King offered him a brown envelope of considerable value)

First off, there's already a unified champion and that is AJ. What you are talking about is undisputed, i.e. no more legitimate belts up for grabs. Yeah sorry my mistake, should've read undisputed. Second, it's not so long ago that Wlad held 75% of the belts, paid the sanctioning fees and the orgs did their mandos the way they usually do when there's an undisputed champ = one after the other. So I see no reason why AJ wouldnt hold onto those belts, especially with the prestige it brings in the division. He might drop one or two along the way but I doubt it happens straight away. I can think of a couple of reasons. Primarily because it ties your hands somewhat. You're depending on the orgs delivering you the right opponents and sometimes they don't. With so many belts you're effectively on a mandatory only track. Which may stop you taking lucrative fights that help move your career along in a better direction. For example, AJ may want to take on a Chinese fighter in order to grow his brand in Asia or take a domestic money spinner like Haye. I also think if you release some of the belts and let others fight for them you build your eventual fight with them also...

Oh and I'd keep all the belts as long as I could.

Let's imagine for a minute that AJ and Wilder happens and one or the other wins all the belts. We will indeed briefly have the WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO, Ring and IBO belts all sitting proudly around the waist of one man... So what happens then? You can't keep all the belts, it would be ridiculous. You would soon collapse under a sea of conflicing mandatories and besides, why would you want to pay all those sanctioning fees? I don't think by that point you need the belts anyway. You are the man. Everyone knows it. So you can relinquish, but do you vacate one, two, three or more of them? I suspect Wilder would retain the WBC and AJ maybe the IBF as they've held them for the longest time. It's nice to still have that title after all and it gives you something to wear after the fight. Then let the others go and eventually fight the winners of them every so often to drive up interest? I think I'd vacate the lot. You keep the Ring of course, no sanctioning fees there. I think however I'd keep the IBO as well. Just for giggles. All of a sudden all those sanctioning authorities would be offering belts that wouldn't mean as much as the poor ol' IBO belt, because it would be the only one that hadn't been cast aside by the division number one. So that's my choice. I'd make the IBO the world's greatest belt. :D What would you do? First off, there's already a unified champion and that is AJ. What you are talking about is undisputed, i.e. no more legitimate belts up for grabs. Second, it's not so long ago that Wlad held 75% of the belts, paid the sanctioning fees and the orgs did their mandos the way they usually do when there's an undisputed champ = one after the other. So I see no reason why AJ wouldnt hold onto those belts, especially with the prestige it brings in the division. He might drop one or two along the way but I doubt it happens straight away.

I wouldn’t say it’s easy at all, barely any fighter has consistently defended all 4 belts since the WBO’s inception. Mandatories aside, the sanctioning fee’s are exorbitant, I’m surprised Wlad continually paid fees to so many organisations fight after fight. All excuses fighters use to justify ditching belts when the truth is that they don't want to have to go in tough every fight. Keeping the belts unified is easy. The problem is that you might lose and now someone else has the unified belts and not you. The sanctioning fees are overstated. The orgs have fee caps, you can negotiate even lower, and some orgs take a lower percentage when you're unified. The belts don't stay unified because the fighters don't want to lose. Plain and simple. We had a nice stretch in the 80s and 90s with a series of undisputed heavyweight champions, but the title was a hot potato because everyone was going in tough and the title only splintered because Bowe blatantly ducked Lewis. Would have been easy to keep the belts together. Wouldn't have been easy to beat Lewis. Big difference.

-The WBC, WBA, and IBF have already gone to great strides to respect each other's mandatory defenses and better align the timing. -The only mandatory defense currently owed by any of the sanctioning bodies is the WBO's title defense by Povetkin (with the winner of the Oquendo-Charr fight being owed a shot at the WBA). -No body has heavyweight final eliminators lined up yet Wilder and Joshua fight (if not this summer, they fight at the end of the year, with Joshua having settled the WBO obligation). With no other mandatory due (unsure of when Oquendo-Charr is supposed to happen), you can freely plan the rematch. After the rematch, the undisputed champion fights the WBA mandatory (Oquendo-Charr winner), followed by the IBF mandatory (Miller-Duhaupas winner vs Whyte/Pulev to determine), then the WBC mandatory (who knows, tbh) and the WBO mandatory (rules aren't clear, but it's my guess that Tyson Fury or the Usyk-Gassiev winner will get that shot), and the the cycle starts again, with voluntary defenses thrown in as time opens up. Joshua-Povetkin (WBO mandatory) Wilder-Breazeale (stay busy) Joshua-Wilder (undisputed) Joshua-Wilder 2 (undisputed) -vs Oquendo-Charr winner (WBA) -vs Pulev/Whyte/Miller winner (IBF) -vs Fury or Usyk/Gassiev (WBO) -vs WBC mandatory (???) Back to the IBF. Assuming no real injuries happen, Wilder and Joshua are both fit enough to fight three times a year, with things spaced out to get to Jan/Feb 2020 without much issue. Giving up whatever the amount ends up being to sanction all of the belts won't come cheap, but there's an added value that comes with being the sole heavyweight champion that makes up for it. Imagine writing all that and then realising that it's the WBA mandatory being forced (Povetkin is the #1 in the WBA and WBO, but the WBO was called last year, Parker fought Fury before Joshua)....... Oops...

Keeping the belts together is very easy. Just fight the mandatories. There's no such thing as conflicting mandatories. Holyfield sued years ago, which lead to the creation of the rotation system. As long as you fight your mandatories in order, you can't be stripped. But fighters want to remain champion as long as possible and they'd rather ditch a belt or two to maximize the chances of keeping at least one belt for as long as they can. The fewer mandatories you have, the more you can cherry pick to protect your belt(s). I wouldn’t say it’s easy at all, barely any fighter has consistently defended all 4 belts since the WBO’s inception. Mandatories aside, the sanctioning fee’s are exorbitant, I’m surprised Wlad continually paid fees to so many organisations fight after fight.