IBF deadline dictated new date for Fury - Usyk

[BodyBagz]

Need to be careful what we wish for.

Prize fighting over organised sport does work. It fails in other areas too.

Fight fans expecting boxing to be anything more than what it has been for the past however many centuries.....kinda silly if you aske me.
Let's just enjoy it, ***** and all

[dan-b]

Fight fans expecting boxing to be anything more than what it has been for the past however many centuries.....kinda silly if you aske me.
Let's just enjoy it, ***** and all

I've taken an interest in the sanctioning bodies since I was a teenager - I'm now a middle aged man. One of the first emails I ever wrote was to the WBA regarding their heavyweight title. (I didn't get a response BTW.)

It doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the sport at all. "Muh A side", "muh split" and inactive social media addicts do, however, detract from it.

[Toffee]

I've taken an interest in the sanctioning bodies since I was a teenager - I'm now a middle aged man. One of the first emails I ever wrote was to the WBA regarding their heavyweight title. (I didn't get a response BTW.)

It doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the sport at all. "Muh A side", "muh split" and inactive social media addicts do, however, detract from it.

I don't see the machinations of sanctioning bodies as being any more credible than the market/commercial positioning. In fact the commercial situation is at least driven by the market and the fighters rather than by corrupt bodies.

As much as I'd like to see the best v the best, it is something quite unique in boxing that it's ultimately about prizefighting.

Soccer gets a Champions League final every year and a World Cup Final every 4 years. In boxing the biggest events come about only on those rare occasions when everything aligns... it does make them special.

[dan-b]

I don't see the machinations of sanctioning bodies as being any more credible than the market/commercial positioning. In fact the commercial situation is at least driven by the market and the fighters rather than by corrupt bodies.

As much as I'd like to see the best v the best, it is something quite unique in boxing that it's ultimately about prizefighting.

Soccer gets a Champions League final every year and a World Cup Final every 4 years. In boxing the biggest events come about only on those rare occasions when everything aligns... it does make them special.

Apologies, perhaps I was unclear. I meant my awareness of sanctioning body machinations doesn't detract from my enjoyment in the way "muh A side", "muh split" does. I wasn't making a judgement on which is better.

With that said, I think there's a qualitative difference. Sanctioning bodies have no legal authority. If two boxers really want to fight they can do so with or without sanctioning body approval.

Example: "muh A side", "muh split" is preventing Canelo - Benavidez - not the WBC. The WBC know very well Canelo can simply drop their belt if he feels forced to without it impacting his earning potential.

[Marchegiano]

Apologies, perhaps I was unclear. I meant my awareness of sanctioning body machinations doesn't detract from my enjoyment in the way "muh A side", "muh split" does. I wasn't making a judgement on which is better.

With that said, I think there's a qualitative difference. Sanctioning bodies have no legal authority. If two boxers really want to fight they can do so with or without sanctioning body approval.

Example: "muh A side", "muh split" is preventing Canelo - Benavidez - not the WBC. The WBC know very well Canelo can simply drop their belt if he feels forced to without it impacting his earning potential.

That is fair clarification.

If I may step in, I do disagree with Toff and to a degree yourself. So if nothing else for a dissenting opinion.

IMO sanctioning bodies, even now, are a net positive for the sport.

What prizefighting void of organized sporting authority brought us was situations where champions really did hold the title ransom without anyone needing hyperbole or exaggeration to describe the situation. Give me X money or there is no title fight, I refuse to acknowledge any champion crowned after me, and I will continue to campaign as champion, good luck getting the fans to agree to anyone else being champion.

So bad it got, champions put out a ransom for the title, got paid, and continued to refuse to release the title by fight or installment because they wanted to run another ransom. If you did not know, it used to be the current champion's honor to elect a new champion without a fight. Which is an entirely different issue that bodies take care of but right now let's focus on ransoms.

Not only did boxing experience a time when champions held ransoms, got the money and did not give up the belt or entertain a fight, and held another ransom, but also this **** went on until the entire nation (England) was so fed up with the situation they decided the best way forward was to go to America and crown a new champion in front of fans who don't know about the English champion.

That's why BK era features American and English champions but no French or German or Spanish or any other nation that was boxing at that time having a champion. Has **** all to do with Americans being interested and everything to do with being able to promote an alternative to the lineal champ because the lineal is a ****sucker who just wants to sit on ass getting paid.

Just like Tyson Fury.

And that's why the WBC and WBA have yet to do anything half as bad as what "it prizefighting doe" has done.


Wahh so many unterbelts ***** you ain't seen a "champion" who hasn't fought in five years but has taken in full purses multiple times. Not once. Prizefighting, it uh bitnass doe, has. Multiple times.




You ain't never seen a champion retire, bring his friend in the ring and give him the belt, and the boxing world respond with yup he sure is the champion now because the last champ said so. Not once in the era of bodies. Multiple times in the prizefighting era.




But dey mandos doe, but dey so many belt doe ignorance, it's not even close to as bad as it has been due to "business"

[dan-b]

That is fair clarification.

If I may step in, I do disagree with Toff and to a degree yourself. So if nothing else for a dissenting opinion.

IMO sanctioning bodies, even now, are a net positive for the sport.

What prizefighting void of organized sporting authority brought us was situations where champions really did hold the title ransom without anyone needing hyperbole or exaggeration to describe the situation. Give me X money or there is no title fight, I refuse to acknowledge any champion crowned after me, and I will continue to campaign as champion, good luck getting the fans to agree to anyone else being champion.

So bad it got, champions put out a ransom for the title, got paid, and continued to refuse to release the title by fight or installment because they wanted to run another ransom. If you did not know, it used to be the current champion's honor to elect a new champion without a fight. Which is an entirely different issue that bodies take care of but right now let's focus on ransoms.

Not only did boxing experience a time when champions held ransoms, got the money and did not give up the belt or entertain a fight, and held another ransom, but also this **** went on until the entire nation (England) was so fed up with the situation they decided the best way forward was to go to America and crown a new champion in front of fans who don't know about the English champion.

That's why BK era features American and English champions but no French or German or Spanish or any other nation that was boxing at that time having a champion. Has **** all to do with Americans being interested and everything to do with being able to promote an alternative to the lineal champ because the lineal is a ****sucker who just wants to sit on ass getting paid.

Just like Tyson Fury.

And that's why the WBC and WBA have yet to do anything half as bad as what "it prizefighting doe" has done.


Wahh so many unterbelts ***** you ain't seen a "champion" who hasn't fought in five years but has taken in full purses multiple times. Not once. Prizefighting, it uh bitnass doe, has. Multiple times.




You ain't never seen a champion retire, bring his friend in the ring and give him the belt, and the boxing world respond with yup he sure is the champion now because the last champ said so. Not once in the era of bodies. Multiple times in the prizefighting era.




But dey mandos doe, but dey so many belt doe ignorance, it's not even close to as bad as it has been due to "business"

This is interesting. I suppose even now there's nothing in theory preventing someone sitting on the "lineal" championship and attempting to extract ransoms. But what you're implying is that a rival can collect the major sanctioning body belts and create sufficient dispute to force the inactive champion to contest it.

I would probably be content if we could return to a situation where there were two or three belts and the rankings were a little more transparent.