Rate these titles, from Best to Worst:

Lineal IBF, WBC (tie) WBA Super WBO Ring

Who you beat for the title is what matters Good point also...

For me: 1. Lineal 2. The RING 3. WBC 5. WBA Super 6. IBF 7. WBO Obviously it can depend on the circumstances behind someone gaining a title (ie. Charles Martin), but in the main, this is how I would rank the titles in importance and prestige. Completely agree... Good post.

the ring, i don't give a fuk about anymore, similar story for WBA IBF, WBC, and WBO are all about the same, but IBF seem the most legit of recent times Lineal is where it's really at for me

Lineal IBF WBC WBO The RING WBA Super ..in that order ...generally speaking ...but as is said above, THE MAN MAKES THE BELT, not the other way around

IBF Lineal The RING WBA Super WBC WBO Lineal WBC Ring WBA WBO IBF

Who you beat for the title is what matters

The Ring Magazine is owned by a promoter so there title holds no significant value anymore. The WBA and WBC are the most corrupt organizations and have the most BS titles. The WBO and IBF do dumb things but not on the same level as everyone else. I would say lineal has the most historical importance and is therefore the most prestigious compared to the rest.

Agreed and Ring means absolutely nothing and lineal means very little I am shocked by this outburst Z! I am heading to the Dubois RBR, where I expect to find you, and we can talk more agreeably there. :lol1:

I really don;t give a fuk about titles at this point. It’s about who beat the man.

I don't see any difference between the alphabet titles. The top belt from each organisation holds the same weight in my eyes Agreed and Ring means absolutely nothing and lineal means very little

It is not about the titles, it is about the guy that has the title. Is the correct answer.

I don't see any difference between the alphabet titles. The top belt from each organisation holds the same weight in my eyes

Lineal The Ring WBC IBF WBA (Super) WBO In my opinion the TBRB is the keeper of the lineal title at the moment and they have the best rankings and they follow their own rules the best. The Ring lost its former credibility but it's still better than the alphabet soups because they rank the entire division whereas the others only rank fighters following a specific path towards their own belts, and none of them rank the champions of the others. The WBC is becoming a joke with their Franchise nonsense but in my opinion they still have the strongest champions. The IBF does a better job than the other alphabet soups of following its own rules, but the problem is that their rankings are frequently awful. Consequently, they often have a terrible mandatory challenger that ends up derailing the IBF champ from bigger, better fights. The WBA is a sad joke. Four freaking belts per division. The WBO does whatever Bob Arum and/or Frank Warren tell them to do. Simple as that.

The Ring Lineal None of the others should exist

lineal ibf wbo wbc wba ring

It is not about the titles, it is about the guy that has the title.

For me: 1. Lineal 2. The RING 3. WBC 5. WBA Super 6. IBF 7. WBO Obviously it can depend on the circumstances behind someone gaining a title (ie. Charles Martin), but in the main, this is how I would rank the titles in importance and prestige.