Comments Thread For: Heads Of WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO Meet In Hopes Of Standardizing Title Unification Bouts Among Other Matters

[landotter]

Since there seems to be enough money to keep these clown cars full, allow me to give a few suggestions that could help:

1) Each sanctioning body allows for the champion of another sanctioning body to be automatically ranked as the #3 or #2 contender on their rankings after so many defenses. So, if say Rock T. Hard wins the IBF title at 160, then after say 4 or 5 defenses the other bodies recognize him as their #3 contender. This will allow unifications to also be used as a recognized defense.

2) There be actual movement from these organizations to support fighting champs as opposed to stagnant ones. If someone wins a belt, they should be required to actually defend it. I know there are rules regarding this, but let's face it: They are very *******ly enforced. Minus an injury, fighting 2-3 times a year for a champion should not be looked at as crazy.

3) Unify stances to get promotional teams and networks to work out standing agreements to how they will share title fights. Obviously, these organizations cannot force Showtime and DAZN to work together or make Top Rank and the PBC to play nice, but they can put pressure on them to at least have a working relationship so these things can be more likely. I know this article (which I found to have just so much opinion placed into it to be stomach churning) pointed out there has been improvement, but come on now. We need a pattern of common sense before this sport can thrive.

4) Transparent ranking systems.

5) Force the IBF to remove "Not Ranked" from their vocabulary.

6) Outlaw any title with the names "Silver", "Super", "Regular", or "Franchise" in front of them under the penalty of pain or death.

Now, allow me go unsaddle my unicorn I just rode in on, clean up my pet Bigfoot, and get my beers cold for the leprechaun I have coming over to watch the game with me. Because fantasies aside, sanctioning fees and politics in these organizations leads me to believe we will have the same mess a decade from now. This is for theater only.

[Butt stuff]

How about they just fight to the death/last one standing.

[BoxingIsGreat]

Where are the jihadis when you need one. A building needs to be blown up.

Thank you. In smoldering heat. Just the belts, tho, not the crooked fat pigs who invented them.
I could be a Jihadi against these belts, from a distance, with my missiles.

[Butt stuff]

I guess it’s better late than never! Hopefully they talk about getting one counsel to mandate boxing….in our dreams right?

Could think of less corrupt people to sit on a council for boxing for sure. Such a deep seated issue for boxing though all round though, AIBA is a total **** show compared to bodies for other olympics sports etc.

[scap]

Since there seems to be enough money to keep these clown cars full, allow me to give a few suggestions that could help:

1) Each sanctioning body allows for the champion of another sanctioning body to be automatically ranked as the #3 or #2 contender on their rankings after so many defenses. So, if say Rock T. Hard wins the IBF title at 160, then after say 4 or 5 defenses the other bodies recognize him as their #3 contender. This will allow unifications to also be used as a recognized defense.

2) There be actual movement from these organizations to support fighting champs as opposed to stagnant ones. If someone wins a belt, they should be required to actually defend it. I know there are rules regarding this, but let's face it: They are very *******ly enforced. Minus an injury, fighting 2-3 times a year for a champion should not be looked at as crazy.

3) Unify stances to get promotional teams and networks to work out standing agreements to how they will share title fights. Obviously, these organizations cannot force Showtime and DAZN to work together or make Top Rank and the PBC to play nice, but they can put pressure on them to at least have a working relationship so these things can be more likely. I know this article (which I found to have just so much opinion placed into it to be stomach churning) pointed out there has been improvement, but come on now. We need a pattern of common sense before this sport can thrive.

4) Transparent ranking systems.

5) Force the IBF to remove "Not Ranked" from their vocabulary.

6) Outlaw any title with the names "Silver", "Super", "Regular", or "Franchise" in front of them under the penalty of pain or death.

Now, allow me go unsaddle my unicorn I just rode in on, clean up my pet Bigfoot, and get my beers cold for the leprechaun I have coming over to watch the game with me. Because fantasies aside, sanctioning fees and politics in these organizations leads me to believe we will have the same mess a decade from now. This is for theater only.

Number 3! You nailed it.

Boxing needs to be bought (by who?) and then networks and promoters become owners of sorts akin to the NFL so no matter who is fighting or what network is showing the fights ALL THE OWNERS/Networks WIN.


Number 3…how do we get all sides to work together? Make them owners?

[-Kev-]

I'm good with having multiple sanctioning bodies since total control under one entity is a pathway to doom, whether in sports or politics or anywhere. But, a lot needs to improve in their cooperation to get what we fans all desire: the best fighting the best for undisputed status in every weight class. Hopefully, they'll be able to get us closer to that reality.

One belt per weight class would likely lead to better fights happening sooner rather than later.

With 4 titles per weight class, 17 weight classes, multiplied by 4, you are looking at 68 champions.

And that is just 68 champions holding the major version of the title.

That is amusing. 68 champions. Good lord. What has boxing done to itself? It’s like if it underwent a botched plastic surgery. It tried to look better but pretty much made its face look ******.

With one belt, we don’t need to see fights like Devin Haney vs Alfredo Santiago for the WBC title.

Or Canelo vs Yildirim.

1 belt per weight class, 1 list per weight class, ranking the top 10. This essentially eliminates no hopers like Yildirim inexplicably being rated the #1 contender for a major title.

Competition would be much better. Jon Doe could no longer magically appear as a top 3 fighter with his piss poor resume.

Having so many titles is detrimental to the sport. It does more harm than good. With 68 major titles in 17 weight classes, we see fighters being champion that would most likely not be a champion if there was only 1 belt.

Going back to Haney, I do not think he can beat Lomachenko or Lopez.

Caleb Plant would not be a champion either.

Tyson Fury would rule HW with an iron fist, no loophole to become champion by fighting another guy for a title.

Terence Crawford has been a champion for a while now. At 34, he has yet to fight an elite fighter. None of the guys he fought would be champion in a 1-belt era. Maybe only Postol.

These titles are awful for boxing.

[Toffee]

Surely sporting commissions can look into their rankings? There's no way they believe what they put out.

Then limit to one champion per org and actually enforce regular mandatories.

If you had mandatories, single belts and good rankings then we'd be getting the big fights.

But Turkeys don't vote for Christmas. It will stay as it is because it works. ie the decision makers are making money.

[harry-greb]

Forget these clowns and put your trust in springs toledo and the guys over at tbrb. Independent rankings by people who know and love the sport.
And not one cent demanded from fighters or promoters!!!!

[Casual Riot]

I remember them doing something like this a few years ago & the WBO didn't show up.

I remember that too - the WBO weren't invited

[rmorris003]

1 belt per weight class and organization aka 4 belts, none of this regular/super/interim/lineal/franchise stuff.