How would boxing turn out if there was only ONE belt for each weight class?

[#1PaperChamp]

Being a champion, and especially a multi-division champion, would actually mean something. Fighters wouldn’t be quick to say titles don’t mean anything if there is only one belt per weight class. There would be an elimination process where the best have to fight the best to get their title shots. Right now all of the sanctioning bodies have different rankings, crazy mandatories, and too many belts for each weight class....regular champ, super champ, silver champ, etc.

Dempsey and I always disagree but hes spot on here. Having more than one champ degrades every title...how can there be championSSSS? Cant be THE BEST if theres multiple "bests"

It's gonna become worst. U have to think about how promotors would take advantage

Uhhh youre an imbecil

[Eff Pandas]

I think it'd be A lot better . I honestly think everybody thinks that boxing is watered down like a mf that's why they're not interested in it .

Watered down is a great way to describe it.

I mean for anyone who disagrees just think if the NFL was broken into 4 leagues & they brought up some college & HS teams to fill up those 4 leagues back to 28, 30 teams. How much less would it matter to win a league title in one of those leagues? How would you ever know which league champ was the best in any given year? That's boxing all the time in most divisions year in & year out. In the most competitive divisions with money fighters maybe league champs play each other once every 2 or 3 years at best. How much of a sh^tshow would be that be for pro football?

[Dip_Slide]

short term it won't be good for a lot of fighters whose claim to fame and sales pitch is being a belt holder but aren't good enough to be the absolute best in their divisions. Also big unification fights would be history. So you're gonna see a lot of people come and go very fast without making any real money in the sport and belts changing very fast like in the UFC. Good for the competition level, bad for the superstar power of the fighters, which clearly bad for the fighter, but not clearly good for the sport since building stars is difficult.

However long term it will give boxing its credibility back which might increase its fansbase again from which all fighters can benefit. I think if we have like 2 or maybe 3 belts, no interim, no franchise, no super, no diamond and definitely no WBO belt who's been proven to be bought by Arum, things would be much better for now, we've had times in the 90s and 2000s where the sport was doing well, everyone was making money, and we had 3 belts. Difference to now is all the bs with the extra belts

[KillaMane26]

Dempsey and I always disagree but hes spot on here. Having more than one champ degrades every title...how can there be championSSSS? Cant be THE BEST if theres multiple "bests"



Uhhh youre an imbecil

Btch *****. U really think promoters not gonna take advantage when there fighter has the only belt in the division?

Regardless that's my fcking opinion.

U ****** btch

[boliodogs]

That is the way boxing should be but isn't and never will be. It would work well if the champion fought at least twice a year and preferably more. He would have to only fight top 10 contenders and fight the number 1 contender once a year. If the champions were cherry pickers like Saunders it would not be good. Rules would need to be in place to prevent that.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

You'd have way fewer undefeated fighters, which would be a good thing. Take an L and learn and move on. The obsession with the "0" needs to go...

[sicko]

It could help as far as getting more #1 vs #2 type of fights like the UFC

With that being Said, having all these Belts wouldn't be bad at all IF Belt Organizations worked together:

Other Champions should still be ranked and still be able to get into Mandatory Position with Other Belt Organizations, THIS would Help force Unification Bouts instead of guys just grabbing a belt and only fighting the sh^t Mandatory's that the Belt Organizations order for the fighter once a year.

Also Belt Organization need to stop auctioning off #1 Contender to promoters and instead have Round-Robin Tournaments among Contenders forcing guys to earn their shot

[GrandpaBernard]

Big fights would get made faster

Every fighter wants to be the champ and with only one belt the title is valuable

Value is linked to scarcity

Imagine it would Crawford feel comfortable camping out at 147 with random matches if only Spence or manny was seen as champ

One belt only makes the champ the official king of his division

[#1PaperChamp]

Btch *****. U really think promoters not gonna take advantage when there fighter has the only belt in the division?

Regardless that's my fcking opinion.

U ****** btch

If there's 1 champ there's 1 champ. Cant really change that regardless of 1 promoter or 20.

Promoters take advantage of everything today. PBC blocking Crawford out or the Floyd and Manny debacle...dont see that happening in a world where theres 1 belt per division. You either promote the champ or you dont

[Marchegiano]

I don't know for sure. I like the one belt system, but, we've never actually had that. Ever. We act like, and sometimes are even told in ****ty articles that were poorly researched there was a single belt era, but, no.

The entire time lineal is the sole belt there are claimants we do not recognize. Lineal is a posthumous award for the era that only had lineal. John L., the first 'champion' only drew the English claimant. The IBU and NSC are active prior to historical sanctioning body recognition. Everyone goes off of when Johnson beat Burns not when Johnson won the IBU and no one recognizes Langford who was an NSC, IBU, FBF, and x5 colored hw champion.

Then the NYSAC joins, then the NBA, and no one really gives a **** until the NYSAC and NBA become the WBC and WBA.

always been a multibelt system.

So how an actual single belt works out, who knows.



I'm not a big fan of the WBA reg, but, wasn't it made up in 2011 so the WBA could adhere to their mandos without forcing Haye to fight Pov or Ruslan instead of Wlad? It was a good move to allow Wlad to gather the WBA title and not get sued by Chagaev or Pov.

Afterward it should have been defunct but it wasn't. I wouldn't mind that. Temporary belts and such so the big fights can happen because no one can take four mandos a year and have time for a vol.