are the belts really that important?

[Larry the boss]

ask GGG...........

[GhostofDempsey]

In the days when there were 8 champions in boxing, belts meant a lot more. Today, there are too many belts in each division that it waters down their value. Sanctioning bodies are so corrupt, I question their ranking system all the time. But, if you plan on staying at a given weight for most of your career, your goal should be unification. Unfortunately there are too many road blocks to unifying, rival promoters being a big part of that.

I think belts become important to a fighter in hindsight, when they look back on their career and what they have achieved. Money is important and the driving factor for a professional fighter, but I think any fighter, regardless of how successful he is, would want to be remembered as a champion at some point.

[Jamie harris]

i see so many **** fights cause someone has been installed as a mandatory, or its a title eliminator or whatever.
In terms of reputations, would a fighter actually be better off getting rid of their belt and just fighting big names? So almost being a 'freelance' fighter so to speak, not affiliating themselves to any organisation. So they dont worry about mandatory fights, eliminators, but they just get themselves to world level and pick and choose who they fight?
does it really mean much to have all your career moves dictated to win/defend a belt which doesnt really mean ****?
What do people think? Does anyone place much importance in the 4 belts? To me winning the belt plays second fiddle to the opponent that you beat, dont know whether others feel the same...

Totally agree with that. I was thinking earlier though if there was only one belt per division, would that be fair. Fights take a while to organise and say an opponent is ranked at #7 then how long with all the other fighters would it take for him to have a crack at the world title. Groves certainly would be ****ed. Realistically if that was the case many fighters would only get the one shot. I think people get carried away with fighters like Pac 8 world titles in 6 divisions or what ever but is fighting Jeff horn. He obviously doesn't agree

[SplitSecond]

Just #'s for history, the names in their primes is what counts. You see lots of bums build up 40-0 records.

Collecting all four belts has a different meaning, like in the days of 1 belt, it more clearly suggests you had to beat the top guys in your division to get it.

[LillianFord]

Not for me..

[HAMMER77777]

OK, I admit Im a a newbie fan, but why not something like this? If we have to have 4 belts per weight class (above my Pay grade to figure out why, but thats another story for Another Time), why not do it like other sports? In NFL, there are 4 "divisions" right? For simplicity, let's disregard wild cards. So, each division Winner, more or less, plays each other, til the Super bowl, and then u have 1 champion. In tennis, there are Quarterfinals, semifinals, and finals.
To get to the point, if we have to have 4 titles at each weight class in Boxing, have, for example, it mandatory, that WBA/WBC titlist Fight each other, then WBO/IBF titlist Fight each other (These would be like the semifinals), and those 2 Winners Must Fight each other. Boom, each weight class is instantly unified, And we Know who the best is in each division. Simple, neat, and clean. But what do I Know?

[future hendrixx]

belts matter. .period. don't be fooled by certain fighters that say the opposite. every boxer is out here belt chasing to build legacy and gain leverage in future negotiations to get bigger paydays. why is spence so hellbent on capturing that ibf belt if belts dont mean sht? cotto can tell the whole world that hes not a middleweight but he has no problem being introduced as a "former mw champion of the world" does he? yes theres a thousand belts out here and its watered down but belts matter nonetheless. look at how excited porter got when he was told his fight with berto was a wbc eliminator. why is he so happy if belts are worthless? sht for the canelo vs. chavez fight they're creating a belt out of thin air to ****e up the promotion. on top of legacy and leverage belts are also great marketing tools.

[QballLobo]

If your a fighter with a following and a big draw on your own the belts mean nothing.
No one but the hardcore fans know who the title holders are and the casuals are what drive PPV sales. So no they aren't that important unless your a butt hurt BBB side fan.

[Real King Kong]

They mean a lot to fighters, cuz for the most part that's how they get name recognition and get in position for money fights.

[IboxSouthpaw]

In my day the belt was everything, now it's the cash