Univesal Title - 1 Weight 1 Champion

[bojangles1987]

Pretty much every boxing fan wants 1 belt per division, but the likelihood of that happening is very low. Maybe one day when boxing is completely ignored in the U.S. and sanctioning bodies get desperate.

[-Hyperion-]

boxers are at fault too for the belt mess.....they get notoriety by having this belts, thus they pay the organiisations to have them in their rankings. They will not go away, even if the elite fighters who dont need belts decide to ignore the alphabets(hard since everyone likes cherry picking the weakest title holder, even the superstars), the next level of succesful boxer(ie-your avarage unknown weak title holder)needs those belts to market themselves......

[javier_83]

wich could be the best solution

[OnePunch]

basically just ignore the sanctioning bodies titles, their only purposes in 2009 are revenue related

lineal and ring champions are all that matter

Yeah, Adamek vs. Bobby Gunn is a great example. lol. Look, Ring is a nice idea, and its good that they dont charge a sanction fee, but the fact that they have no mandatory defenses means the champ can fight whoever he wants, whenever he wants, and can ignore the top ranked contenders until he retires if thats what he wants to do.

You cannot expect the fighters and promoters to police themselves. Require a Ring champ to defend against a top 3 contender at least once a year and I'm on board.

[ianblake]

there is only one Universal Champion

[IMG]http://i30.***********.com/albums/c333/o0javi0o/CarlitosColon2.jpg[/IMG]