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

[DuttyAlacrity]

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.

We're splitting hairs at this point because I count the legacy of the EBU and NYSAC in that of the WBC. It's not that EBU gave WBC it's blessing, it's more of that fact that the EBU IS the foundation of the WBC. The NYSAC, which was prestigious in its own right, became a part of the WBC in the 70's. That should count for something right? Seeing that they had a choice to either dissolve entirely or become a part of the WBA or the WBC. The fact they chose the WBC counts for something to me. In addition, the WBC stood by Ali with his rematch with Liston and when he refused the US draft. The WBA was the first to drop him on both occassions. The NYSAC was the first to recognize Frazier as champ too.

In any case, the ring magazine title supercedes all the alphabet titles in my opinion.

[Konstantin]

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

My guess is it is considered the better belt because in general their rankings are more in tune with the general consensus.

Everyone in this thread has come in an agreed that the WBC is the most "prestigious" belt. Why is that? If there were no differences between the belts then theoretically the votes would have been split up 4 ways in a question of which belt was best. 1/4 would think WBC, 1/4 would think WBA etc.

But that was not the case. 99% of people in this thread said WBC was the best belt. Why is that?

[Konstantin]

Just to solidify my argument a little check out this thread from 2006: http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...rankings+belts

76% percent of BoxingScene thought the WBC was the most presitgious. That isn't random at all. The general consensus is WBC is best. Why exactly is that? No one knows, but probably the most important factors are Champions, Rankings and Rules.

[DuttyAlacrity]

My guess is it is considered the better belt because in general their rankings are more in tune with the general consensus.

Everyone in this thread has come in an agreed that the WBC is the most "prestigious" belt. Why is that? If there were no differences between the belts then theoretically the votes would have been split up 4 ways in a question of which belt was best. 1/4 would think WBC, 1/4 would think WBA etc.

But that was not the case. 99% of people in this thread said WBC was the best belt. Why is that?

this is also true. They all suck but the WBC apparently sucks the least... they're working on that apparently... with all this silver belt crap

[American Dream]

Who knows? It's just his thing. Belts ain't that important at this point in his career. That said, I'm surprised he don't want Shane's WBA belt since he could add 1 more statistic trying to catch up to Pac.

he could care less about catching up to another fighter or getting belts...
he could easliy have that..thats why its not important to him..
and no one cares about belts

[Alibata]

Just curious as to why this is. Are they more prestigious than the rest?

Belts just collect dust....

[CiganoBoxer]

Lennox Lewis allways said the WBC was like gold to him

[StarshipTrooper]

My guess is it is considered the better belt because in general their rankings are more in tune with the general consensus.

Everyone in this thread has come in an agreed that the WBC is the most "prestigious" belt. Why is that? If there were no differences between the belts then theoretically the votes would have been split up 4 ways in a question of which belt was best. 1/4 would think WBC, 1/4 would think WBA etc.

But that was not the case. 99% of people in this thread said WBC was the best belt. Why is that?

The problem is 99% of the posters in NSB are window licking spastics so why give any credence to what they vote?

Poet