WBA really needs to fix "Super" and "Regular"

[The3]

What about when Machado beat Corrales for the "Super" title, then they downgraded him to "Regular" champ so Tank could fight for the "Super"

Yeah why did Golden Boy let that go? Now Tank is holding the real WBA championship belt at 130

[Combat Talk Radio]

What about when Machado beat Corrales for the "Super" title, then they downgraded him to "Regular" champ so Tank could fight for the "Super"

That's exactly what I'm talking about. There was no reason for that change and keeping "Regular" just enabled that behavior.

[sicko]

All about collection more and more sanctioning fees $$$ they don't care about anything else clearly

[Shane1091]

There should only be 1 or Max two belt's not 5 and I think IFB and WBA should be cancelled it's ruining boxing.

[suffolkbull3]

The thing is, the "Super" champion is arguably the best in the division. Assuming there is one. That's true even now of the WBA.

Problem is, with different letter orgs there's different exposures internationally. So WBC really only means a damn in the US. WBA and, and to a lesser degree IBF, IBO and NABF have largely been overseas titles. It wasn't until Manny got schooled by a teacher from Down Under that the WBO was mostly trapped in the US, but then Horn lost it in the US so it's trapped there again.

Of the orgs though, WBO and IBF are the only consistent ones. WBC gets hype because of the promoters but it's just as guilty of this sprawl if not more.

Theres already 4 titles anyway, how do you tell who the best is when most the time the champions dont even fight each other. How about we go to 1 title, then we will know who the best is.

i have been saying this for years! Having one belt per division i believe will actually help the sport tremendously. Fighters would actually care again about having that 1 belt around their waist. Then i truly believe we would actually get to see the best fight the best more often. I believe promoters would all be scrambling to get possesion of the belt as well therefor making cross promotional fights easier to make. Just my opinion.

[Marchegiano]

I've often wondered if we even need the orgs, because if they can cover countries all over the world, why can't the athletic commissions do the same? They could come up with a standardised belt system and kick out all those greedy ****s that always seem to have their hands in the cookie jar, and just because they've "worked hard" to establish the system that supports it.

I don't even know anyone who could confidently name a champion AND which belts he holds these days

The sanctioning bodies are the athletic commission's world coverage in a weird indirect way.

Originally you have amphitheatres who operated rather like dojos. Then comes sporting clubs, professionals coming together to call their own shots. From the clubs comes the commissions. Government controlling the professionals because criminals had taken over most of the business.

Governments, America, France, UK, even **** Germany, didn't so much want to oversee boxing themselves as much as make sure there was an agency to oversee it.

So in the UK you have the National Sporting Club becoming the BBBoC. In America the New York State Athletic Commission had a monopoly for one year then the NBA formed to oversee the states the NYSAC did not. In France you have the IBU to oversee most of Europe. I'm pretty sure the IBU is the first true sanctioning body, 1910, and it had minimal government involvement much like present bodies, but the IBU was taken by the ****s who changed its name to something with like five A's in it but did little else then it reformed as the EBU under the WBC.

The NYSAC created the WBC to get out of doing exactly what you're asking. The WBC is the NYSAC's old boxing arm, plus the NSC now BBBoC and IBU now EBU.

So, you did once have a time in just about every early boxing nation when the commissions or government bodies were directly involved, but never a time when they wanted to be outside of their own territories. I mean the BBBoC is happy to oversee British boxing not any version of the World Title. That's why the NSC is becoming the BBBoC right around the time the World Title is really taking hold worldwide. NY doesn't want to crown a World Title for the same reason. It's just way bigger than what their actual jobs are. So as the English and American titles of Burke and Hyer days faded to the Sullivan and Fitzsimmons era World title the governing bodies that used to oversee the smaller territories first got rid of the criminal element as best they could, which is why any of them were involved in the first place, then found it necessary to outsource the vast majority of the organization behind boxing to businessman....other criminals.


The honest truth is the bodies used to do a lot of good in boxing. It's sad they've become the criminals they were meant to stamp out.




I personally don't have any issue with commissions taking over again. It's be about damn time, but given they only do that begrudgingly I doubt it's something that will ever happen again.


Edit- I should point out, look how long the NYSAC is the NYSAC before they become the WBC. They tried pretty hard to be the sanctioning body themselves but in the end they were forced into the WBC.

[NC Uppercut]

I'm not even talking who to face who. But following history and lineage is straight up exhausting. You could build a college course around it.

Should but won’t

[Willy Wanker]

The WBA Super title was supposed to only be rewarded to the WBA champion who's unified.

I see a lot of "Super" Champions who aren't unified champions yet they still have a "regular" champion in the division.