Quit Complaining About Alphabets, Just Ignore Them

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

By Jake Donovan - It never fails. The moment a sanctioning body appeases a promoter's request to make available a title for any given fight, someone in the media is soon to follow, pitching a ***** about how the alphabets have ruined our beloved sport.

In such articles, the following are never found to be at fault, or certainly not the focal point of said rant: promoters, fighters, managers or publicists.

All of the aforementioned are every bit as guilty as the titles they praise and promote for whatever relevance the sanctioning bodies retain these days. Yet it's the heads of the major sanctioning bodies who can never escape the crosshairs. [details]

[PittyPat]

Yup. In the end we should concern ourselves solely with a fighter's resume, win/loss record and performances in the ring. After all these belt mishaps (Clottey, Bradley, Gamboa, Valuev, etc.), I'm hereby going to stop giving a **** about whether someone's champ or not - if they're obviously the best or amongst the best in a division, then that's what I'll choose to acknowledge and celebrate.

[OnePunch]

Interesting take Jake, but titles ARE important to 99% of the fighters out there. Ever notice how it's only AFTER a fighter reaches a certain "economic" level that they start talking about how titles "don't matter" anymore? And believe me, without titles, all you would have is the most recognizable 3 or 4 names in each division fighting each other over and over again. The hard working, quality fighters who just dont happen to have a huge following would NEVER get a chance at the big time. Sure, as of late the sanctioning bodies have made defending themselves quite difficult with their absurd actions, but without mandatory defense requirements we possibly would never have gotten Jones-Tarver, Taylor-Pavlik, Diaz-Campbell, Berto-Collazo, or a hundred other good fights that only got made because the "champ" didnt want to give up the title for not facing their #1 contender. Guys like Josh Clottey, Ali Funeka, Chris John, Celestino Caballero, Jorge Linares, etc. would NEVER get to the level they have, without a ranking or a title, because sometimes a title or a #1 ranking is the only leverage a lesser-known guy has to force a fight with the champ (or the big-name).
But I think you could add context by just renaming the belts. Since most of the time its difficult, even with a high ranking, to get a shot at a champion unless you happen to be signed with the same promoter as that champion (or can bring enough $$ to the table that they cant pass it up). Since fighters are most often fighting someone within the same promotional umbrella (unless its a mega-fight or a mandatory), you could just have the Golden Boy title, the Top Rank title, the Universum title, the Gary Shaw title, and so on and so forth. And then occasionally you get a super fight between the Golden Boy champ and the Top Rank champ (i.e. Hatton vs. Pacquiao, etc.) Actually, thats basically what we have already.
And as for going back to "one champ per division", well that just wont work anymore. Guys just dont fight as much as they did back then. Fighting 2 or 3 times a year (instead of 8 or 10 back in the day) would mean it would take someone close to 4 years from the time they get ranked to getting a title shot. And most likely nobody in the top 10 would want to fight each other, because then they would start that timetable all over again should they take a loss. The ratings would be at a standstill. And the reason guys dont fight as much anymore is because everyone relies on tv, and there just arent enough dates available for everyone. But whose fault is that? Is it the fighters fault for having too high of purse demands? Is it the promoters fault for not wanting to risk a live gate and only take the guaranteed tv money? Is it the fans fault because they dont come out to the shows enough to make promoters confident enough to go without tv? Take your pick.....

[MANGLER]

I wish more fighters would **** on the alphabet belts and just focus on the Ring belt.

[Dave Rado]

I wish more fighters would **** on the alphabet belts and just focus on the Ring belt.

The biggest problem IMO is the mainstream media, e.g. boxing correspondents for the national newspapers or broadcasters, who have no interest in or understanding of the Ring or lineal titles.

See here for example:

Ricky Hatton is the current light welterweight kingpin, has been for years in fact, yet there are others within the 140 division who are currently laying claim to being ‘the champion’. At present Timothy Bradley parades the WBC and WBO baubles, Juan Urango punches under the IBF banner, whilst the aforementioned Kotelnik holds his trousers up with a little black number sponsored by the WBA. During the recent Holt-Bradley telecast, Showtime managed to identify all of these men as champions, with Ricky Hatton harvesting nary a mention and here lies a major problem. Whilst Ricky has proven himself the best light welterweight in the world, in the ring where it counts, what exactly is it that these men champion?

If even Showtime think paper belt holder = world champion, and Ring/lineal title holder = also ran, what hope is there?

Mainstream newspaper coverage is at least as bad. Here's a recent example from the so-called boxing correspondent of the British newspaper The Independent:

As Britain's only universally recognised world champion (Hatton has an IBO belt, but that is just a piece of boxing bling) Froch understandably feels slighted. "British TV has shown some farcical fights in the past, but to snub one of this magnitude is a disgrace."

The fact that Hatton is Britain's only lineal and Ring world champion and that Froch is only ranked #6 at his weight doesn't register with this so-called "boxing correspondent".

As you'll see if you follow the link and look at the comments section, I've tried to educate the author of the piece, but I doubt he reads the comments. The Independent is a print newspaper really, the website is just a secondary media for them (like the New York Times or Washington Post in the States).

It's all very well for hardcore fans to say that The Ring belt is what really matters, but until the mainstream media does likewise, the alphabet organisations will still run the sport.

Most boxers don't fight for The Ring belt, currently, they fight for paper titles, which is why so many Ring titles are vacant; and the mainstream media is largely to blame, IMO.

Regarding OnePunch's post, I agree that there are no simple answers, and that if there were no mandatories, that would create a new set of problems. However, if the media simply gave precedence to The Ring/lineal titles and mentioned the alphabet titles in proper context (not ever calling the belt holders world champions unless they are lineal champions, for instance, and calling lineal champions world champions regardless of whether they hold alphabet titles or not), then I think the non-hardcore public would have a much better sense of what's really what, and The Ring/lineal title would then be much more sought after than it is at the moment, which would be much healthier for the sport.

[Shadow boxer 3]

I wish more fighters would **** on the alphabet belts and just focus on the Ring belt.

co-sign. the only belt that really matters is the RING belt because u hav to actually earn it. its not just givin to u by default or just for the hell of it. u hav to fight the best to get it

[HK45]

I think in boxing you need multiple belts due to the fact that the best fights are hard to make. Case in point Floyd not fighting a top welterweight and holding hostage the ring belt while defending them against anyone he choose. If we're going to have one belt it should be made clear that you have to defend it against the top ranked fighters in said division and not look for challengers elsewhere and still be able to retain their belt.

Saying that I don't think it will ever happen and alphabet titles are here to stay. Everyone likes to parade into the ring wearing a belt no matter how meaningless it is.

[EL ANIMAL]

Yeah the only one that matters now is the ring belt!!!

[hammerhiem]

I agree with DaveRedo's post and also would like to add that the reason Hatton doesn't hold a belt is because the IBF Stripped Malinaggi of his belt on the evening of the fight because he wasn't fighting Ngoudjo.

Think about that for a second.

The IBF stripped Malinaggi of his belt for not rematching a guy he had already beaten and then had Ngoudjo fight a Guy Hatton had already beaten for the vacant title.

They only did it because they knew Hatton had no interest in fighting BS mandetory challengers like Ngoudjo, Randall Baily and Francisco Figueroa.

[Dave Rado]

I agree with DaveRedo's post and also would like to add that the reason Hatton doesn't hold a belt is because the IBF Stripped Malinaggi of his belt on the evening of the fight because he wasn't fighting Ngoudjo.

Think about that for a second.

The IBF stripped Malinaggi of his belt for not rematching a guy he had already beaten and then had Ngoudjo fight a Guy Hatton had already beaten for the vacant title.

They only did it because they knew Hatton had no interest in fighting BS mandetory challengers like Ngoudjo, Randall Baily and Francisco Figueroa.

Good point, and it illustrates the problem with what OnePunch says. As I say, the solution lies with the media, IMO, but I don't know what can be done about the fact that most of the mainstream media buys into the alphabet bull****.