WBO belt is respected in low divisions only

None of them mean anything unless they make fights happen. We know who the best fighters are in a division. We don't need rankings. Belts have two merits - making mandatories and enforcing a standard on voluntary defences. And they hardly ever get those right. And they typically get in the way of the biggest fights. It's the fighter, not the belt. But fighters and promoters are still playing the belt game.

It has been respected at 147 for a long time. Many people believe Crawford is the best welterweight. In the past some great warriors held that title ( Margarito, Cotto, Williams, Pacquiao, Bradley) . That belt also has some respect in divisions under 147. 154 champ Teixeira? Nobody cares. 160 champ Andrade? Nobody cares. 168 champ Saunders? Nobody cares.. WBO heavyweight title was never important, many guys vacated it to challenge for other belts... It is what it is, WBO has some respect at welterweight and divisions under.. Sanders, Mercer, Moorer & a cou[ple others I believe vacated it because it was just a stepping stone belt. The WBO created their belt when Mike Tyson was the undisputed champion. Francesco Damiani & Johnny DuPlooy fought for the vacant title while Tyson was king. It has always been a secondary belt. They have titles in regions that lack depth like the WBO Africa title & the Asian Pacific & Oriental titles which give fighters top 15 rankings. I remember years ago people thought I was a fool when Alex Leapai beat some scrub for the WBO asian pacific/oriental titles & I said he was one win away from a title shot at Klitschko. Nobody on this site thought it would happen then he fought Boytsov in a final eliminator & beat him. The WBO has always been a joke with it rankings because of all the foolish regional belts it has. Frank Warren is in bed with them just like Don King used to be with the WBA.

WBC, WBA, IBF............................WBO WBO is the youngest and wasn't fully Recognized until 2004 so yeah really don't care too much about the WBO and that is no disrespect to the Current fighter who hold them but it is a young belt and just doesn't have the same "prestige" as the other 3 https://c8.alamy.com/comp/D5M4R5/marvin-haglersupplied-by-photos-incf0848credit-image-supplied-by-globe-D5M4R5.jpg I was of this opinion until Naseem Hamed showed up.

I like the WBO because it allows fighters to move up and immediately challenge the champ at the higher weight. Really allows guys to be as great as they want. That sounds good in theory, but in practice that's how you end up with Andrade vs Walter Kautondokwa for a vacant belt or Amanda Serrano vs some jazzercise class lady for several vacant belts which she then vacated herself without defending.

All four governing bodies are a joke. The WBO likes to get their favored fighters patsies to knock over for vacant belts. Most of Amanda Serrano's title wins are against horrible opponents for vacant belts. Demetrius Andrade is a 2 division champion and has never fought a quality opponent. They were talking about getting Joe Parker another title shot for beating Junior Fa, who is barely ShoBox level. They generally bend the knee to whatever Bob Arum or Frank Warren want. The IBF frequently screws up big, good fights to make their champion fight a mandatory against some bum nobody ever heard of because their rankings are hot garbage. They at least usually follow their own rules, which is more than can be said about the other three, but they still do more harm than good in the sport of boxing. The WBA crowns as many as four champions in one division. The biggest joke of the four. Enough said. The WBC is starting to crown a ton of champions per division like the WBA, and they also play favorites like the WBO. Fighters with big star power (Canelo, Mikey, Wilder, Fury, Lomachenko, Charlo) get preferential treatment and they don't even try to hide it. They usually favor PBC fighters but not always. And The Ring is literally owned by a promoter (Oscar De La Hoya) rather than just being a promoter's lackey like the others. That's why TBRB and lineal titles matter.

WBO is weak as ****.

I like the WBO because it allows fighters to move up and immediately challenge the champ at the higher weight. Really allows guys to be as great as they want. That's true, and a neat feature in my opinion.

The WBO is one of the few world sanctioning bodies staying away from creating multiple world title belts within the same division. People are just used to discrediting because it's one of the younger sanctioning bodies, and if they hate Bob Arum, they'll usually hate the WBO too. I like the WBO because it allows fighters to move up and immediately challenge the champ at the higher weight. Really allows guys to be as great as they want.

WBO = Warren Boxing Organisation Only in the UK. Over here it’s “We’re Bob’s organization”

WBC, WBA, IBF............................WBO WBO is the youngest and wasn't fully Recognized until 2004 so yeah really don't care too much about the WBO and that is no disrespect to the Current fighter who hold them but it is a young belt and just doesn't have the same "prestige" as the other 3 https://c8.alamy.com/comp/D5M4R5/marvin-haglersupplied-by-photos-incf0848credit-image-supplied-by-globe-D5M4R5.jpg This^^^^^^^^^

WBC, WBA, IBF............................WBO WBO is the youngest and wasn't fully Recognized until 2004 so yeah really don't care too much about the WBO and that is no disrespect to the Current fighter who hold them but it is a young belt and just doesn't have the same "prestige" as the other 3 https://c8.alamy.com/comp/D5M4R5/marvin-haglersupplied-by-photos-incf0848credit-image-supplied-by-globe-D5M4R5.jpg

WBO is respected when it isn't held by dangerous guys like Crawford and Andrade.

At HW the belt was the champions belt for well over a decade until Fury vacated Cruiserweight - Usyk held the title, and before that Huck was at the top of the division for a long time Light Heavyweight - Kovalev and Ward held the title for a time The belt has never been that relevant at super middleweight other than Calzaghe Middleweight - last time it was relevant was Hopkins/Taylor I don’t think it was ever relevant at 154. Maybe Canelo when he beat Smith I don’t think the evidence here fits that argument. The WBC has been less relevant at Heavyweight, Cruiserweight, light Heavyweight than the WBO

The WBO is one of the few world sanctioning bodies staying away from creating multiple world title belts within the same division. People are just used to discrediting because it's one of the younger sanctioning bodies, and if they hate Bob Arum, they'll usually hate the WBO too.

WBO = Warren Boxing Organisation

At 147 the WBO belt has been the TR belt. Most of those fighters never won the other title belts and wouldn't even challenge for them. Floyd won that WBO belt and dropped it and guess where it went back to, TR fighters

Ray Mercer held it

How did the wbo get respected enough to be a major sanctioning body in the first place ? Oscar Delahoya 1994 De La Hoya won the World Boxing Organization super featherweight title in March, retained the belt by knocking out Giorgio Campenella in just three rounds in May, and then won the vacant WBO lightweight title in July. He defended the lightweight title twice more during the year, knocking out Carl Griffith in three rounds in November and defeating John Avila by technical knockout in December.

How did the wbo get respected enough to be a major sanctioning body in the first place ? Riddick Bowe and Hamed held those titles for a while. It was a minor title for the fighters that were not connected to reach but once the bigger names starting holding them it became one of the four. IMO they should be only one per weight division.

Possibly, but the champ makes the belt imo.