Is this statement true?

Great to know I'm not the only one lol. Like I mentioned to Eff if boxing were easier to follow like UFC as in weights and champions then it would be easier for people to become fans of the sport. I know though. Never will happen. Doh. Never say never bruh. Dana White's been talk-teasing for a while bout crossing over. There's some models out there that might work. The issue like you said, will be the sanctioning bodies allowing that to happen. People tend to put up a fight when you start reaching in their pockets...

:wave: :newbie: I think I'd consider myself pretty much having the same level of boxing interest as yours. The last couple years I took more of an interest and became much more informed. That said, I still think there are more contenders than belt holders. Some divisions have only 1 or 2 belt holders. Others with 4 (or even 5) titlists, have a mandatory that's a contender usually. I think it's fair to say, that at times, there may very well be more "champions" than contenders; But for the most part I'd accept there are about 10 contenders per division, with up to FIVE titlists among that 10. That's not to say the championships are not diluted today. Definitely too many belts, too many so called champions, and not enough definition on who the real champ of the division is. Peace. :beerchug: Great to know I'm not the only one lol. Like I mentioned to Eff if boxing were easier to follow like UFC as in weights and champions then it would be easier for people to become fans of the sport. I know though. Never will happen. Doh.

Whats a legit contender by most folks definition. To me boxing should be simple. There is 1 real champ & 10 contenders. So in todays world that means there are 3 or 4 other title holders who are realllllly just contenders & taking a contenders position. So yea its 30/70, 40/60 for me when 3 or 4 of the 10 contenders are title holders leaving only 6 or 7 of those being just legit contenders without a belt. Cheers Eff. That's a really easy way to make sense of how it should be. Simplified.. I think this is part of the reason why casuals find it hard to get into boxing is the over use of belts and weight divisions. If it were more easier to understand I think more people would become fans.

I put dont know because theres alot of grey area in calling someone a legitimate contender. Im not sure what seperates a normal title challenger to a legitimate contender . I do think there are too many world champions tho Great points -

Put it this way I'm pretty much a newbie to this sport and it has taken me about 2 years of being on boxing scene and following this sport jyst to know what all these belts are and what for and my head still spins about some of this ish. So yer this would not surprise me at all. :wave: :newbie: I think I'd consider myself pretty much having the same level of boxing interest as yours. The last couple years I took more of an interest and became much more informed. That said, I still think there are more contenders than belt holders. Some divisions have only 1 or 2 belt holders. Others with 4 (or even 5) titlists, have a mandatory that's a contender usually. I think it's fair to say, that AT TIMES, there may very well be more "champions" than contenders; But for the most part I'd accept there are about 10 contenders per division, with up to FIVE titlists among that 10. That's not to say the championships are not diluted today. Definitely too many belts, too many so called champions, and not enough definition on who the real champ of the division is. Peace. :beerchug:

Whats a legit contender by most folks definition. To me boxing should be simple. There is 1 real champ & 10 contenders. So in todays world that means there are 3 or 4 other title holders who are realllllly just contenders & taking a contenders position. So yea its 30/70, 40/60 for me when 3 or 4 of the 10 contenders are title holders leaving only 6 or 7 of those being just legit contenders without a belt. Interesting. I understand EXACTLY what you are saying. Let's call it the "10 Contender Rule", if you will. Yes, the championships are diluted to an extent cuz of all the belts, but generally there are still more contenders than belt holders. Some divisions only have 1 or 2 belt holders. There are easily 5 contenders in a division. Even if the division has 4 different belt holders, each mandatory is normally a contender right off the bat....

I put dont know because theres alot of grey area in calling someone a legitimate contender. Im not sure what seperates a normal title challenger to a legitimate contender . I do think there are too many world champions tho

Put it this way I'm pretty much a newbie to this sport and it has taken me about 2 years of being on boxing scene and following this sport jyst to know what all these belts are and what for and my head still spins about some of this ish. So yer this would not surprise me at all.

It all hinges around the word "legitimate", so I guess we could never have a definitive answer. But, most legit contenders I see are guys who have some sort of title already. And, the champs and the legit contenders don't fight each other.

I've mentioned this in a previous post. The US Federal Government actually has oversight over boxing via the Ali act. At this point they should create a belt system and have all the State AC's only allow those belts to be official and negate all the other belts. Most countries will acknowledge this belt since its officially sanctioned by the US Government.... Only need one Belt per division.

Not true at all; the fighters of today are 100x better than the fighters in the past. There's just so many champion level fighters now, because boxers are up-to-date on all the latest training techniques. The level of skill is just much higher these days. completely disagree with all 3 points

In some weight classes this is true. In others it isn't. this also... it depends what you count as a legitimate champion

Depends if you consider the secondary belt holders as champions if you do then that statement is true

Legitimate contenders are hard to come by nowadays. If they have 10 fights, without a loss, seems like they go down Diva Street instead of facing one of the over exasperated Champions

Depends on weight class like someone mentioned

Surprised I haven't thought of this but I think it is true. Dilutes the value of being a champion now.

In some weight classes this is true. In others it isn't. True, I believe the statement means overall in boxing.

Poll added.

Heavyweight: Wilder, Joshua, Fury, Ortiz, possibly Ruiz Jr, possibly Pulev, and Usyk after we see him in a legit heavyweight fight, are the legitamate contenders (Wilder and Ruiz are the titlist). Can't really say much about cruiserweight because Usyk blew up that situation. Light heavyweight: Beterbiev-Gvozdyk, Bivol, Kovalev, Gzovdyk, maybe Pascal, maybe Yarde, maybe Browne, maybe Elieder Alvarez, maybe Zurdo Ramirez (Beterbiev, Bivol, and Canelo are the titlist). Super middleweight: Callum Smith, David Benevidez, Caleb Plant, BJS, and things fall a bit after that. Middleweight: Alvarez, Charlo, Golovkin, Andrade, maybe Korobov, maybe Eubank Jr. 154: JRock, Harrison, Charlo, Munguia, Lubin, Lara, maybe Castano, and a nice group of guys on the cusp. 147: Spence, Crawford, Pacquiao, Porter, Danny, Thurman, possinly James, etc. Bored with the whole thing now, but you get the point. that is a really good job of picking the legitimate contenders.

Can of worms, what is legitimate? Folks balked at Usyk-Spong, I thought Spong was a good choice myself, a legitimate introduction to HW. Some folks mad Fujimoto is fighting DD. I think that's a fine pairing for DD. I think probably the hype is what's bad not so much the fighters. The way folks talk is like the current champs are at all times lightyears ahead of any comp, then they lose and we make excuses for them and hardly ever just give a man a fair shake. Chisora, for example, is either overpraised like he's a great old'en or he's under appreciated as if he's never given us a good showing. I'm pretty liberal actually. I realize the difference between most champs and the next guy in line ain't that much actually. Wilder-Fury comes to mind. Bum with no skills, but, he somehow caught the best mover in the division perfectly. Inversely, Fury has no chin even though he got the **** up. Truth is, they're very very close. If you are referring to Wilder he's hardly a bum. That somehow you are referring to happens a lot to his opponents.