Does the WBA "regular" title count as a legit title?

[Pigeons]

Sometimes we count it and sometimes we don't.

[Vegemil]

Only in boxing can a corrupt organization split their world title into minor and major while having their fans lap it up.

Champion: a winner of first prize or first place in competition.

Nah let's have a "regular" first place winner and a "super" first place winner. Only in boxing.

[MASTERBX]

For Deadzone and their zombies yes! For the real boxing world NO!

[Eff Pandas]

Eh. I mean for ABC belts yea they count I guess. I dont really give a f#ck about all that bs, but I know lotsa mfers do still. Its all so confusing & boring I cant be bothered to give a f#ck whos got what belt. Its silly bs & I see why casuals only come for the big fights. Everything else is too confusing so it all feels diminished & less important even when it is important but its not a big fight so gets less attention.

To me what matters for real is who is in the #1 spot. I wish more folks talked about & cared about that.

[Loque-san]

Absolutely not. But to every rule, there is an exception. If the WBA 'Regular' champion is considered by most a better fighter than the WBA 'Super' champion and is consistently defending his title against better opposition and always at the division weight limit, then he should be regarded as the legit WBA champ. Super, Regular, Interim or whatever is mostly about business and politics.

[The D3vil]

Man, I don't even know anymore.

[L. Cipher]

As ass backwards as the WBA is, it counts to those who hold them and fight for them and pay the WBA for the right to do so...

[QueensburyRules]

vote and discuss

- -Are you real or a fig leaf of your imagination?

[Roy Keane]

Well it should and the super belt should **** off.

[REdrUm0351]

Boxing is a corrupt watered down mess. Unfortunately there isn't anyone standing up to this BS and it will only get worse.