Who's the worst four-weight champion in history?

[Santa_]

Arce was a 3 weight champ not a 4.

[Vegemil]

I chose Broner because Leo Gamez' Boxrec picture could be easily photoshopped to add in a ****.

[N/A]

Arce was a 3 weight champ not a 4.

Unfortunately Santa, you are mistaken. Arce held the WBO at 108, 115, 122 and 118 (in that order).

[Pigeons]

Do interim titles even count? Would Asce even be considered 4 division champ?

He won the full title in 4 different weight classes.

One of Arce's is a WBO belt from before the WBO was recognized, so I'd say he's the worst.

He also won the WBC light flyweight title.

[N/A]

He won the full title in 4 different weight classes.





He also won the WBC light flyweight title.

Of course, and I'm not dis*****g that he's a 4 division champ, but I consider it a knock on a fighter's legacy to go after unrecognized titles like that, even if they become recognized later on.

When comparing Arce to Broner, Broner gets the nod for me because he held big 3 titles in 4 of the divisions he was champion at, while Arce only held a big 3 title in 1 of the 4 divisions he was champion at. The WBO is technically a recognized title now, but I don't consider it equal to the others.

[Santa_]

Unfortunately Santa, you are mistaken. Arce held the WBO at 108, 115, 122 and 118 (in that order).

Oh yeah you're right, had to double check.


http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/6642

[Pigeons]

Of course, and I'm not dis*****g that he's a 4 division champ, but I consider it a knock on a fighter's legacy to go after unrecognized titles like that, even if they become recognized later on.

When comparing Arce to Broner, Broner gets the nod for me because he held big 3 titles in 4 of the divisions he was champion at, while Arce only held a big 3 title in 1 of the 4 divisions he was champion at. The WBO is technically a recognized title now, but I don't consider it equal to the others.

I agree. That's why I only consider Crawford a 1-weight champ. The WBO is wack. I bow down to the WBA, WBC, and IBF. They have more integrity.

[N/A]

Oh yeah you're right, had to double check.

Not a problem. Happy to help.

[N/A]

I agree. That's why I only consider Crawford a 1-weight champ. Thr WBO is wack. I bow down to the WBA, WBC, and IBF. They have more integrity.

As we stand here in 2018, I would say the WBO has more integrity than the WBA, but regardless of my personal opinion or your personal opinion, boxing has four recognized world titles and so Crawford is going to be credited as a multi-division champion.

But it's hard for me to ever take the WBO seriously when they only exist because Bob Arum exposed the WBA's bribery operation and when the WBA blackballed the head of their bribery operation, he got mad and started the WBO. How can I ever take seriously a title that only exists because the bribery leader of the WBA got fired and was forced to start a new bribery ring?

[Pigeons]

As we stand here in 2018, I would say the WBO has more integrity than the WBA, but regardless of my personal opinion or your personal opinion, boxing has four recognized world titles and so Crawford is going to be credited as a multi-division champion.

But it's hard for me to ever take the WBO seriously when they only exist because Bob Arum exposed the WBA's bribery operation and when the WBA blackballed the head of their bribery operation, he got mad and started the WBO. How can I ever take seriously a title that only exists because the bribery leader of the WBA got fired and was forced to start a new bribery ring?

Let's be honest, only the IBF is legit, and that's because they're run by the feds.