Are there any differences between the belts really??

[Benncollinsaad]

The fighter makes the belt. You can say a fighter has a "****ty" belt, but if he beat ass to get there, then it's fine.

Exactly. Calzaghe held the WBO belt, the least regarded of the four major belts. Same with Eubank and Michalczewski. But they made it worthy.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Exactly. Calzaghe held the WBO belt, the least regarded of the four major belts. Same with Eubank and Michalczewski. But they made it worthy.

Belt dont make the fighter, the fighter makes the belt.

[Pullcounter]

I was thinking, WBC and WBA are often maligned and bashed for being unfair and corrupt while IBF is considered the more "cool" and less corrupt organisation/belt. Is that really so? I mean, WBC and WBA have usually had more great champions than IBF. Kessler is the WBA champ. Actually now it seems as if WBC has become a more "trashy" title than WBA, which previously was considered(and in large part thanks to guys like Ruiz and Valuev) the most "******" title.

they are all corrupt.

[catalinul]

They all are Mickey Mouse belts.

[Benncollinsaad]

They all are Mickey Mouse belts.

Says you. Then I suppose only the ring belt is the REAL one? That's unfair. Do you then say that Ali was a Mickey Mouse champion since he held the WBA but not the Ring belt??

[catalinul]

Says you. Then I suppose only the ring belt is the REAL one? That's unfair. Do you then say that Ali was a Mickey Mouse champion since he held the WBA but not the Ring belt??

I didn't say the ring is the only real one.

But it's the most legitimate.

[Benncollinsaad]

I didn't say the ring is the only real one.

But it's the most legitimate.

Fair.........