Seven years since the last heavyweight unification bout...

[Guest]

... okay, you could call it three because Big Len was dropping them but still consider rightfully as The Man, so it makes no odds. He was dull at times, but you knew where you were with Big Len.

But I'm wondering why we're all accepting that there's no unification bouts over THREE YEARS since Big Len packed it in? I know politics and promotions play a big part in it, but it's killing off the sport at the most mainstream end. Shouldn't we be DEMANDING that at least two of the titlists fight each other?

Stuff like Wlad vs. Briggs or Wlad vs. Peter (okay, before he had the IBF, I know...) prove nothing as neither clearly have/had any real chance to beat Little Klit and it says more about Wlad's plummeted stock than the opponents that anyone believed they could. The fact that we're in an age of ex-Lewis opponents (Briggs getting his shot nearly a decade after meeting Big Len, and the mediocre Rahman holding onto his paper crown) shows how bad things have got.

It's not UNREASONABLE to ask that with the division possessing four separate title belts (or three, if that's your preference) that at least TWO of those titlists should have fought each other for some sort of idea as to how the division will go forward. HBO promoted Rahman-Toney as this, but in real terms it meant nothing. Rahman got the belt out of the ring, Toney shouldn't even have been fighting for it, having only just come off a failed drugs test. And in terms of belts, then it's really just the WBC belt changing hands (or not). We need those trinkets married in combat.

I'm not a fan of belts over all else, but we need to know where we stand. Screw fighting mandatories and voluntary defences... become THE champ, THEN take on the routine challenges.

[scap]

... okay, you could call it three because Big Len was dropping them but still consider rightfully as The Man, so it makes no odds. He was dull at times, but you knew where you were with Big Len.

But I'm wondering why we're all accepting that there's no unification bouts over THREE YEARS since Big Len packed it in? I know politics and promotions play a big part in it, but it's killing off the sport at the most mainstream end. Shouldn't we be DEMANDING that at least two of the titlists fight each other?

Stuff like Wlad vs. Briggs or Wlad vs. Peter (okay, before he had the IBF, I know...) prove nothing as neither clearly have/had any real chance to beat Little Klit and it says more about Wlad's plummeted stock than the opponents that anyone believed they could. The fact that we're in an age of ex-Lewis opponents (Briggs getting his shot nearly a decade after meeting Big Len, and the mediocre Rahman holding onto his paper crown) shows how bad things have got.

It's not UNREASONABLE to ask that with the division possessing four separate title belts (or three, if that's your preference) that at least TWO of those titlists should have fought each other for some sort of idea as to how the division will go forward. HBO promoted Rahman-Toney as this, but in real terms it meant nothing. Rahman got the belt out of the ring, Toney shouldn't even have been fighting for it, having only just come off a failed drugs test. And in terms of belts, then it's really just the WBC belt changing hands (or not). We need those trinkets married in combat.

I'm not a fan of belts over all else, but we need to know where we stand. Screw fighting mandatories and voluntary defences... become THE champ, THEN take on the routine challenges.

I think Henry Ackinwande has a lot to do with the lack of unification bouts in recent years, if your gonna lay blame on somebody I think you gotta put it square on the fighting Zulu's shoulders...

Thats just my opinion though.

[r_sendo]

we need a legit champion. recognized as the man of the HW division.

[Hitman932]

im pretty sure that wlad would fight any one of the title holders, they just dont want any part of him, he cant make them fight him.

[Shanus]

... okay, you could call it three because Big Len was dropping them but still consider rightfully as The Man, so it makes no odds. He was dull at times, but you knew where you were with Big Len.

But I'm wondering why we're all accepting that there's no unification bouts over THREE YEARS since Big Len packed it in? I know politics and promotions play a big part in it, but it's killing off the sport at the most mainstream end. Shouldn't we be DEMANDING that at least two of the titlists fight each other?

Stuff like Wlad vs. Briggs or Wlad vs. Peter (okay, before he had the IBF, I know...) prove nothing as neither clearly have/had any real chance to beat Little Klit and it says more about Wlad's plummeted stock than the opponents that anyone believed they could. The fact that we're in an age of ex-Lewis opponents (Briggs getting his shot nearly a decade after meeting Big Len, and the mediocre Rahman holding onto his paper crown) shows how bad things have got.

It's not UNREASONABLE to ask that with the division possessing four separate title belts (or three, if that's your preference) that at least TWO of those titlists should have fought each other for some sort of idea as to how the division will go forward. HBO promoted Rahman-Toney as this, but in real terms it meant nothing. Rahman got the belt out of the ring, Toney shouldn't even have been fighting for it, having only just come off a failed drugs test. And in terms of belts, then it's really just the WBC belt changing hands (or not). We need those trinkets married in combat.

I'm not a fan of belts over all else, but we need to know where we stand. Screw fighting mandatories and voluntary defences... become THE champ, THEN take on the routine challenges.

You talk sense, but the more champions, the more money boxing makes.

That's just the way it is, and with only one champion, in this day and age, we'd get most likely 4 title fights a year per each weight division, that's not including injury.

[Derranged_]

... okay, you could call it three because Big Len was dropping them but still consider rightfully as The Man, so it makes no odds. He was dull at times, but you knew where you were with Big Len.

But I'm wondering why we're all accepting that there's no unification bouts over THREE YEARS since Big Len packed it in? I know politics and promotions play a big part in it, but it's killing off the sport at the most mainstream end. Shouldn't we be DEMANDING that at least two of the titlists fight each other?

Stuff like Wlad vs. Briggs or Wlad vs. Peter (okay, before he had the IBF, I know...) prove nothing as neither clearly have/had any real chance to beat Little Klit and it says more about Wlad's plummeted stock than the opponents that anyone believed they could. The fact that we're in an age of ex-Lewis opponents (Briggs getting his shot nearly a decade after meeting Big Len, and the mediocre Rahman holding onto his paper crown) shows how bad things have got.

It's not UNREASONABLE to ask that with the division possessing four separate title belts (or three, if that's your preference) that at least TWO of those titlists should have fought each other for some sort of idea as to how the division will go forward. HBO promoted Rahman-Toney as this, but in real terms it meant nothing. Rahman got the belt out of the ring, Toney shouldn't even have been fighting for it, having only just come off a failed drugs test. And in terms of belts, then it's really just the WBC belt changing hands (or not). We need those trinkets married in combat.

I'm not a fan of belts over all else, but we need to know where we stand. Screw fighting mandatories and voluntary defences... become THE champ, THEN take on the routine challenges.

When I first joined boxingscene almost two years ago, I created a thread regarding heavyweight unification. I'm still waiting for some kind of unification bout(s) but I'm not getting my hopes up. I think that one of the problems with even partial unification is that none of the current "titlists" have any sense of urgency or motivation and are afraid to risk losing their belt against one another.

IMO, the blame should rest solely with the fighters themselves. After his dramatic capture of the IBF belt, Wlad Klitschko could have stepped up and demanded a fight with one of the other beltholders before signing a fight with Briggs to take place 7 months later in November.

Also, why has Hasim Rahman committed to fighting the winner of Toney-Peter? If he beats his mandatory in Maskaev, why can't he them push for a fight with Valuev, Byrd, or Lykavich? Surely any fighter who has possesion of more than two of the champion belts would be IMO considered the "real champ" of the division and probably would lead to more lucrative fights.

The logic here defies me.

[OptimusWolf]

Shanus, v true in the short term, but long term the strategy is flawed. Casual fans bring the money, and boxing has plenty it could pick up if it was clearer about what were the big fights.

Boxing is stripping itself of its assets and is on the way to becoming a small minority sport at risk of a ban as the world becomes more "*******" over the next 20 years.

[Derranged_]

Shanus, v true in the short term, but long term the strategy is flawed. Casual fans bring the money, and boxing has plenty it could pick up if it was clearer about what were the big fights.

Boxing is stripping itself of its assets and is on the way to becoming a small minority sport at risk of a ban as the world becomes more "*******" over the next 20 years.

WTF??

[Shanus]

Shanus, v true in the short term, but long term the strategy is flawed. Casual fans bring the money, and boxing has plenty it could pick up if it was clearer about what were the big fights.

Boxing is stripping itself of its assets and is on the way to becoming a small minority sport at risk of a ban as the world becomes more "*******" over the next 20 years.

UFC has too many fans for boxing to close down.

UFC being the more dangerous sport, in a short term visual atleast.

Fans know what the big fights are, title bouts are irrelivant to what the 'big fights' are. I want one champion per weight division, but 4 main belts per division makes alot more people happy, although they don't realise it.
With 4 belts, Denmark can keep their Mikkel Kesslers, and Britain their Ricky Hattons, and Joe Calzaghes.
It generates a whole lot more cash over a duration of time than a singular world title fight, 4 times a year would.

[K-DOGG]

... okay, you could call it three because Big Len was dropping them but still consider rightfully as The Man, so it makes no odds. He was dull at times, but you knew where you were with Big Len.

But I'm wondering why we're all accepting that there's no unification bouts over THREE YEARS since Big Len packed it in? I know politics and promotions play a big part in it, but it's killing off the sport at the most mainstream end. Shouldn't we be DEMANDING that at least two of the titlists fight each other?

Stuff like Wlad vs. Briggs or Wlad vs. Peter (okay, before he had the IBF, I know...) prove nothing as neither clearly have/had any real chance to beat Little Klit and it says more about Wlad's plummeted stock than the opponents that anyone believed they could. The fact that we're in an age of ex-Lewis opponents (Briggs getting his shot nearly a decade after meeting Big Len, and the mediocre Rahman holding onto his paper crown) shows how bad things have got.

It's not UNREASONABLE to ask that with the division possessing four separate title belts (or three, if that's your preference) that at least TWO of those titlists should have fought each other for some sort of idea as to how the division will go forward. HBO promoted Rahman-Toney as this, but in real terms it meant nothing. Rahman got the belt out of the ring, Toney shouldn't even have been fighting for it, having only just come off a failed drugs test. And in terms of belts, then it's really just the WBC belt changing hands (or not). We need those trinkets married in combat.

I'm not a fan of belts over all else, but we need to know where we stand. Screw fighting mandatories and voluntary defences... become THE champ, THEN take on the routine challenges.

The WBC, WBA, IBF, & the WBO have all had me carted off their premisis with picket signs in hand.