One World Title vs Multiple World Titles

[Stoppage]

Which one is better for boxing? To have one world title in each division or to have multiple world titles in different sanctioning bodies (WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO, etc.)?

In my opinion, it's better to have one world title. Having that one title proved that you were better than the rest.

[MANGLER]

No reason at all for there to be all these different belts beyond the sanctioning bodies gettin paid. Ring belt is what counts.

[Southpaw Stinger]

No reason at all for there to be all these different belts beyond the sanctioning bodies gettin paid. Ring belt is what counts.

Aye, Ring belt or fuck off calling yourself world champ!

[Thread Stealer]

I definitely prefer one world title.

I will say, though, that multiple world titles can be good for the avoided high risk/low reward titles.

There's more titles to choose from, they're more likely to get one of them and use the belt as a marketing tool.

[BigMacFoster]

You're asking a question of which everybody would answer the same response.

People underestimate the selling power of a real world title fight,You add on the "world title" tag to the prop belt and you'd easily sell more tickets

No reason at all for there to be all these different belts beyond the sanctioning bodies gettin paid. Ring belt is what counts.

Ring belts mean very little

[JAB5239]

Ring belts mean very little

Yet its more reputable today than any of the alphabet titles. Go figure.

[roxy]

ONE TITLE PER DIVISION-no contest!!!!!

[Brassangel]

I don't mind the IDEA of several belts, so long as it creates conversation and the potential for explosive unification bouts.

If, however, it becomes abused by those who want an easy route to a claim as champion (see: nearly everything Floyd Mayweather's done), then I think it sucks donkey turds.

[El_Cholo]

to be honest I'm fed up trying to figure who's what champion nowadays, especially when it comes to the WBA.

WBA World Champion, WBA Super World Champion, WBA Champion in Recess etc etc interim champs wtf????

[Joe2608]

The Ring belt is by far the best idea of who rules the division. However, i have a couple of criticisms.

First of all, a lot of the divisions right now don't have a champion if you look at their ratings. The main problem for this is because unlike the 4 Major ABC belts, The Ring does not force people to fight for their belt. As far as i know you can hold the Ring belt for as long as you want without having to face the best contender, no mandatory defenses or anything.

Secondly, sometimes it can be wrong, like when Joel Casamayor had the Ring belt at Lightweight not so long ago and there was Juan Diaz (who many thought was the real champion) with 3 of the major abc belts. There was also Manny Pacquiao who had recently defeated David Diaz for the WBC belt who would clearly beat Casamayor.