When did the WBO officially become a major title?

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • buddyr
    Undisputed Champion
    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
    • Feb 2014
    • 5041
    • 1,288
    • 350
    • 34,653

    #1

    When did the WBO officially become a major title?

    Back in the 90s during it's early years, no one recognized it. Herbie Hide was a 2 time hw champ and when Bowe was the WBO champ, he was never recognized as being a 2 time champ. Hamed used to avoid mandatories of his other titles and remain loyal to the WBO but it still wasn't being recognized. The first time I remember it being considered major was when DLH was "given" the 160 lb belt in the Sturm fight and then took a dive and gave it to Hopkins. Did DLH and later Bob Arum's check book legitimize the WBO? I personally think the IBO is more credible.
  • famicommander
    Banned
    Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
    • May 2018
    • 10628
    • 5,781
    • 1
    • 49,546

    #2
    Sometime in late 2006/early 2007 is when it became universally recognized.

    The WBA recognized them in 2000
    The WBC recognized them in 2004
    The IBF recognized them in late 2006/early 2007

    Comment

    • PunchMeIDareYou
      Undisputed Champion
      Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
      • Oct 2015
      • 1534
      • 238
      • 505
      • 34,851

      #3
      The WBO is the weakest of the bunch.

      Comment

      • boliodogs
        Undisputed Champion
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • May 2008
        • 33358
        • 824
        • 1,782
        • 309,589

        #4
        Originally posted by famicommander
        Sometime in late 2006/early 2007 is when it became universally recognized.

        The WBA recognized them in 2000
        The WBC recognized them in 2004
        The IBF recognized them in late 2006/early 2007
        You really know your stuff on this. Very impressive.

        Comment

        • boliodogs
          Undisputed Champion
          Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
          • May 2008
          • 33358
          • 824
          • 1,782
          • 309,589

          #5
          Originally posted by PunchMeIDareYou
          The WBO is the weakest of the bunch.
          The WBC must be the silliest of the bunch.

          Comment

          • Vinnykin
            Undisputed Champion
            Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
            • Feb 2016
            • 5150
            • 200
            • 118
            • 78,217

            #6
            I always looked at Chris Eubank as a world champ when he held the WBO title between 1990 and 1995..... I was just a boy at the time though.

            Official or not....... 15 million people tuned into his fights right through that period, and people look back on him as being a world champion.

            When the other bodies recognised them dis not really come into it.

            Comment

            • Cobra Curry
              Undisputed Champion
              Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
              • Dec 2017
              • 1344
              • 111
              • 350
              • 34,979

              #7
              Originally posted by Vinnykin
              I always looked at Chris Eubank as a world champ when he held the WBO title between 1990 and 1995..... I was just a boy at the time though.

              Official or not....... 15 million people tuned into his fights right through that period, and people look back on him as being a world champion.

              When the other bodies recognised them dis not really come into it.
              A man of my vintage. I was on the
              Benn side of the fence so him beating Barkley was big for me.

              Still, I didn't see the WBO as the full article until Naz started beating the other champs.

              Today, the WBC's making them look like a serious organisation lol.

              Comment

              • Vinnykin
                Undisputed Champion
                Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                • Feb 2016
                • 5150
                • 200
                • 118
                • 78,217

                #8
                Originally posted by Cobra Curry
                A man of my vintage. I was on the
                Benn side of the fence so him beating Barkley was big for me.

                Still, I didn't see the WBO as the full article until Naz started beating the other champs.

                Today, the WBC's making them look like a serious organisation lol.
                At the end of the day, it comes down to the fights and public perception.

                Whether they hold the WBA, WBC, IBF or WBO means literally nothing to me now, and never has.

                You can hold the WBO and be passed over, like Crawford or Eubank or Calzaghe have....... conversely you can hold a WBC for 5 years fighting shiat opponents like Wilder did...... all the while claiming you have the most prestigious belt and even naming it.

                Means nothing, when fighting Stiverne, Arreola, Washington, Spziltska or whatever.

                The title you hold does not define your career in any way to most of the public.

                Comment

                • Cobra Curry
                  Undisputed Champion
                  Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
                  • Dec 2017
                  • 1344
                  • 111
                  • 350
                  • 34,979

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Vinnykin
                  At the end of the day, it comes down to the fights and public perception.

                  Whether they hold the WBA, WBC, IBF or WBO means literally nothing to me now, and never has.

                  You can hold the WBO and be passed over, like Crawford or Eubank or Calzaghe have....... conversely you can hold a WBC for 5 years fighting shiat opponents like Wilder did...... all the while claiming you have the most prestigious belt and even naming it.

                  Means nothing, when fighting Stiverne, Arreola, Washington, Spziltska or whatever.

                  The title you hold does not define your career in any way to most of the public.
                  Couldn't have said it better.

                  Comment

                  • KingHippo
                    Undisputed Champion
                    • Jun 2016
                    • 3457
                    • 168
                    • 40
                    • 38,705

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Vinnykin
                    You can hold the WBO and be passed over, like Crawford or Eubank or Calzaghe have....... conversely you can hold a WBC for 5 years fighting shiat opponents like Wilder did...... all the while claiming you have the most prestigious belt and even naming it.

                    Means nothing, when fighting Stiverne, Arreola, Washington, Spziltska or whatever.
                    If you add Povetkin and a younger Ortiz to this resume, it looks pretty good. Too bad they were too chicken to fight him clean.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    TOP