would boxing be better if they forget about the abc belts?

[boxasmash]

and more emphesis is put on the ring magazine belt or even another belt? every fighter fighting for the legit title of the division and not some ****ty belt which makes it almost impossible for undisputed champions by poxy mandatories?

is it the way forward? recently seeing bradley stripped, dawson stripped, clottey stripped etc makes me laugh. these guys are so pig greedy it's bringing the sport down.

1 legit belt = bigger, better fights.

[larry x]

i think the answer is quite obvious

[boxasmash]

i think the answer is quite obvious

what can we do if anything to do that?

what work has to be done to get to that point? maybe ring magazine offering money to the champ, or some other ridiculous idea. aslong as there are paper champions boxing will suffer.

[PittyPat]

The Ring happens to be a magazine... hence, a 'paper' title too?

Seriously, I'm not acknowledging any belts now. Everyone knows roughly who the best are in a division, so fuck the belts. The fighters can scramble over them and claim to be "a great champion" all they like -- I rank fighters on their fighting.

[Miburo]

Obviously. The only positive purpose the title belts serve is to get more fighters some exposure than they might not otherwise receive, but at the cost of diminishing interest in the sport as a whole.