Can someone explain the story or rationale of Floyd only wanting the WBC belts?

[Konstantin]

No the WBA has the most legacy, and no belt today really holds any prestige. Its the fighter who makes the belt, not the other way around.

WBC does hold more prestige. The fighter does make the belt in the end but WBC still has more prestige than the other 3.

[-Spinal-]

If I recall correctly you called it the "official" belt. What makes it "official"?

Jab, my friend, I think if we stop being technical for a bit here we'll see WBC is regarded as the official belt by the majority of boxers. But if you want to get technical then no, maybe it's not the official one.

[JAB5239]

That could be argued, but the WBC incorporates the NYSAC and EBU (or IBU) both of which have been active before the NBA. They were the only organization that actually incorporated reps from different countries in it's inception, so the WBC has more legacy. The WBA also has a super champ, an undisputed super champ, a regular champ and if i'm not mistaken an interim champ... the WBC is not that much better... but in the land of the blind...

Im not arguing one is better than the other because I think they all suck. But the WBC cannot have more legacy since it was an offshoot of the WBA, which was formed in 1921 under its original name, the NBA.

[JAB5239]

WBC does hold more prestige. The fighter does make the belt in the end but WBC still has more prestige than the other 3.

I can respect your opinion, I'll just ask you to explain why the WBC is more prestigious?

[JAB5239]

Jab, my friend, I think if we stop being technical for a bit here we'll see WBC is regarded as the official belt by the majority of boxers. But if you want to get technical then no, maybe it's not the official one.

Kev, with all due respect, how is it considered official by the majority of boxers? You my man and Im not trying to be a **** to you, but was there a poll? One belt simply isn't better than another today. Its all about the man representing that belt. Back when there was only one title is was usually the best guy wearing it, the most deserving. That isn't true today. The best could be wearing any belt today and he'd be considered the world champ. Not because of the belt, but because he's the best.

[Pirao]

Well, they're the coolest looking ones.

[Jack_DempseyCSC]

have to say i totally agree with everything i've read so far from JAB5239,there is no official title,but unlike the WBC the WBA can say that at one time their belt was the official title,the only reason i can think of why alot of fighters may favour the WBC belt is because it is defo the coolest looking belt out of the lot and it did go through a phase were it was publicized more than any of the other belts.

[DuttyAlacrity]

Im not arguing one is better than the other because I think they all suck. But the WBC cannot have more legacy since it was an offshoot of the WBA, which was formed in 1921 under its original name, the NBA.

the NYSAC and the EBU (IBU) came out before the NBA. At one point it was the NYSAC, the EBU and the NBA. The NBA formed WBA in the 60's. The EBU and other commissions formed the WBC in the 60's in response (granted after the WBA) and NYSAC later joined the WBC. NYSAC and the EBU were NOT offhshoots of the NBA. The EBU has been around since 1910 homie.
My logic: EBU and NYSAC > NBA.

[cupocity303]

Because it was the first organization created?

I think the WBC existed before any of the others, the WBO was the last one hence why it took years for them to establish themselves as World-Title.



EDIT: THE WBA was the first one created, so I don't know.

[JAB5239]

the NYSAC and the EBU (IBU) came out before the NBA. At one point it was the NYSAC, the EBU and the NBA. The NBA formed WBA in the 60's. The EBU and other commissions formed the WBC in the 60's in response (granted after the WBA) and NYSAC later joined the WBC. NYSAC and the EBU were NOT offhshoots of the NBA. The EBU has been around since 1910 homie.
My logic: EBU and NYSAC > NBA.

You're missing the point my friend. This isn't about how long the NYSAC or EBU has been around, but the WBA and WBC. The WBA has been around and recognized since 1921 (under its original name the NBA) where as the WBC did not form until 1964. Because the NYSAC or the EBU gave the WBC its blessing does not mean it has a deeper legacy than that of the WBA. It also doesn't make it a better organization or any more legit. As I've stated, they all suck, but the WBA is the longest reigning org that has been recognizing world champions out of the 4 major orgs today.