Value of Titles?

[Tyson2k7]

What is the value of a title in terms of the organization? Which is more valuable ? Or does it even matter now a days?

Also makes them more or less valuable then the other?

[frankpaganini]

What is the value of a title in terms of the organization? Which is more valuable ? Or does it even matter now a days?

Also makes them more or less valuable then the other?

i would say no titles are THAT important anymore.

True Champions are usually viewed (today) in the eyes of the critics and fans...titles have become nothing more than a way to make a poster boy out of an organization (WBO, WBC, IBF, WBA).

If i had to pick a belt that was most important it wouldnt be those 4. i'd say the ring magazine belt is probably most notable.

The sanctioning bodies are courrpt and basically decide who they want carrying their belts.

they dont matter as much today.

I'd say the fans and critics pretty much decide who the REAL champ is.

for example:

in the 140lb division there are 4 titles held by 4 different fighters...none of which are ricky hatton however in the eyes of majority ricky hatton is the champ at 140...

so titles arent everything.

[Kilrain]

Doesn't matter a damn, guys like Barrera and Pac proved that. When Hamed and Barrera met it was the battle for featherweight supremacy and it was fought for the freakin IBO belt. Belts are meaningless, even more so because of this Super champion bull. I couldn't name most beltholders.

[Don Corleone]

I agree mostly with what is said here. Belts don't really mean much nowadays. It about skill and heart. Champions aren't necessarily the greatest in the division. Also belts aren't worth as much because of how much there are in each division. There are many great boxers who aren't champions

[VERSION1 (V1)]

they dont mean nothing

[Addison]

The fighters themselves covet the Ring Championship and the WBC Championship the most. Then the IBF and WBA in interchangable order.

Any championship belt is a good championship belt to a modest, hardworking athlete in the sport of Boxing.

[luke_ski]

In the old days, champions were simply determined by how often they won and lost and to whom. They never necessarily had any specific belt. It's the same now. The fighters aren't really fighting for any specific title. The Ring title is probably the best at trying to pick a specific person in any weight class.

[NeXt In Line]

Yeah, the belts aren't really as meanginful as they used to be. If I had to rank the belts, I'd say they went like this:

1. WBC
2. The Ring
3. IBF
4. WBA
5. WBO

However, certain fighters hold only one belt, but are easily viewed as the best in the division. Calzaghe was the WBO Champion at 168 for 10 years, and while Kessler held the WBC/WBA belts, everyone understood that Calzaghe was still the man.

If I'm not mistaken, didnt Tarver and Johnson basically vacate their belts and fight for The Ring belt, simply because there were mandatories and such, and they knew they were the two best in the division?