None of the belts mean anything... It's the fighters that hold them that bring credibility..
Which belt is more relevant? WBO World Belt or WBA World Belt (regular)
Collapse
-
-
Just to clarify the officially stated purpose of the WBA 'Super' title is for WBA world champions who are also champions for one the other orgs. ie. It's a belt for unified champs. The reason, they say, is to allow for less regular defences in acknowledgement of the responsibilities a unified champ has to defend his non-WBA titles. Apparently it was instigated at the suggestion of Lennox Lewis. Myself, I think it's a crock and basically an excuse for more sanctioning fees, but I can see the logic behind it.
Examples - Floyd at 154, Frampton, Rigondeaux, Donaire at 130 etc. Theres plenty more examples
In fact, its funny when you have unified WBA regular champions - Froch was 'unified' WBA regular and IBF, Canelo was 'unified' WBA regular and WBC. Its beyond a jokeComment
-
Comment
-
You know its a scam as the WBA frequently crown WBA Super champions who aren't unified.
Examples - Floyd at 154, Frampton, Rigondeaux, Donaire at 130 etc. Theres plenty more examples
In fact, its funny when you have unified WBA regular champions - Froch was 'unified' WBA regular and IBF, Canelo was 'unified' WBA regular and WBC. Its beyond a joke
Sturm was the first example that occurred to me, but yeah, there's many egregious cases of their total disregard for the own regulations.Last edited by Citizen Koba; 10-16-2016, 12:20 PM.Comment
-
Thurman who doesn't have the Super belt.
Don't you consider him a World Champion (there is no Super Champion in his division)?
Thanks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...xing_championsComment
Comment