What is the point of multiple champions and belts? Wouldn't boxing be a lot more interesting if it was just one champion and a belt?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
I'm confused.... Why not just have ONE. champion and belt for each weight class?
Collapse
-
Tags: None
-
Because, you can’t really go back to where it was when there’s businesses involved.
Boxing is a fragmented sport and not under one company, unlike UFC, who can have one belt that represents their company.
Boxing is load of companies doing business with each other, with no overall commission, it’s very rare in that respect.
The WBC, IBF etc.. are not going to close their business down just so boxing can have one champ per division. It’s like Pepsi closing down their business so only Coca Cola can exist.
Unless one of the belt organisations go bust, i would say it’s more likely in future to get more recognised belts per division than less.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by HitmanTommy View PostWhat is the point of multiple champions and belts? Wouldn't boxing be a lot more interesting if it was just one champion and a belt?
It's a little bit like the LPRR vs the QB title. Bodies is just another rule change with a title that represents those rules.
Pretty sure the IBF and WBO both formed out of pissiness for how rankings are done by the WBA, but, it's been a while.
Comment
-
Originally posted by HitmanTommy View PostWhat is the point of multiple champions and belts? Wouldn't boxing be a lot more interesting if it was just one champion and a belt?
Every other sport has a system in place to determine who’s the best. That’s what Americans like.
Comment
-
Comment