Is this statement true?

[strykr619]

I've mentioned this in a previous post. The US Federal Government actually has oversight over boxing via the Ali act. At this point they should create a belt system and have all the State AC's only allow those belts to be official and negate all the other belts. Most countries will acknowledge this belt since its officially sanctioned by the US Government....

Only need one Belt per division.

[Redd Foxx]

It all hinges around the word "legitimate", so I guess we could never have a definitive answer. But, most legit contenders I see are guys who have some sort of title already. And, the champs and the legit contenders don't fight each other.

[Eff Pandas]

Whats a legit contender by most folks definition.

To me boxing should be simple. There is 1 real champ & 10 contenders. So in todays world that means there are 3 or 4 other title holders who are realllllly just contenders & taking a contenders position. So yea its 30/70, 40/60 for me when 3 or 4 of the 10 contenders are title holders leaving only 6 or 7 of those being just legit contenders without a belt.

[BLASTER1]

Put it this way I'm pretty much a newbie to this sport and it has taken me about 2 years of being on boxing scene and following this sport jyst to know what all these belts are and what for and my head still spins about some of this ish.
So yer this would not surprise me at all.

[tophat1]

I put dont know because theres alot of grey area in calling someone a legitimate contender. Im not sure what seperates a normal title challenger to a legitimate contender .

I do think there are too many world champions tho

[CauliflowerEars]

Whats a legit contender by most folks definition.

To me boxing should be simple. There is 1 real champ & 10 contenders. So in todays world that means there are 3 or 4 other title holders who are realllllly just contenders & taking a contenders position. So yea its 30/70, 40/60 for me when 3 or 4 of the 10 contenders are title holders leaving only 6 or 7 of those being just legit contenders without a belt.

Interesting. I understand EXACTLY what you are saying.
Let's call it the "10 Contender Rule", if you will.

Yes, the championships are diluted to an extent cuz of all the belts, but generally there are still more contenders than belt holders.
Some divisions only have 1 or 2 belt holders. There are easily 5 contenders in a division. Even if the division has 4 different belt holders, each mandatory is normally a contender right off the bat....

[CauliflowerEars]

Put it this way I'm pretty much a newbie to this sport and it has taken me about 2 years of being on boxing scene and following this sport jyst to know what all these belts are and what for and my head still spins about some of this ish.
So yer this would not surprise me at all.

I think I'd consider myself pretty much having the same level of boxing interest as yours. The last couple years I took more of an interest and became much more informed.
That said, I still think there are more contenders than belt holders. Some divisions have only 1 or 2 belt holders. Others with 4 (or even 5) titlists, have a mandatory that's a contender usually. I think it's fair to say, that AT TIMES, there may very well be more "champions" than contenders;
But for the most part I'd accept there are about 10 contenders per division, with up to FIVE titlists among that 10.

That's not to say the championships are not diluted today. Definitely too many belts, too many so called champions, and not enough definition on who the real champ of the division is.
Peace.

[CauliflowerEars]

I put dont know because theres alot of grey area in calling someone a legitimate contender. Im not sure what seperates a normal title challenger to a legitimate contender .

I do think there are too many world champions tho

Great points -

[BLASTER1]

Whats a legit contender by most folks definition.

To me boxing should be simple. There is 1 real champ & 10 contenders. So in todays world that means there are 3 or 4 other title holders who are realllllly just contenders & taking a contenders position. So yea its 30/70, 40/60 for me when 3 or 4 of the 10 contenders are title holders leaving only 6 or 7 of those being just legit contenders without a belt.

Cheers Eff.
That's a really easy way to make sense of how it should be.
Simplified..
I think this is part of the reason why casuals find it hard to get into boxing is the over use of belts and weight divisions.
If it were more easier to understand I think more people would become fans.

[BLASTER1]

I think I'd consider myself pretty much having the same level of boxing interest as yours. The last couple years I took more of an interest and became much more informed.
That said, I still think there are more contenders than belt holders. Some divisions have only 1 or 2 belt holders. Others with 4 (or even 5) titlists, have a mandatory that's a contender usually. I think it's fair to say, that at times, there may very well be more "champions" than contenders;
But for the most part I'd accept there are about 10 contenders per division, with up to FIVE titlists among that 10.

That's not to say the championships are not diluted today. Definitely too many belts, too many so called champions, and not enough definition on who the real champ of the division is.
Peace.

Great to know I'm not the only one lol.
Like I mentioned to Eff if boxing were easier to follow like UFC as in weights and champions then it would be easier for people to become fans of the sport.
I know though.
Never will happen. Doh.