1 or 4 belts per weight in boxing?

What opinions do people have on this, should there be one world champion(per weight) or is the current format the best?


Floyd Mayweather - 1st legitimate 5 division fighter in history!?

Quite simply there should be only one title. How is it possible to have a true world champ when there are three other fighters holding other belts all claiming to be the best?

Ali, Marciano, LaMotta, Louis, Robinson are all remembered as being true world champs and held only one belt. It won't be possible for todays fighters to be recognised in the same league as them because of the amount of titles available these days. They can fight, get beat for one title (if they hold more than one) and still leave the ring as a title holder.

Maybe a league system with one belt for the winner might do the trick? That way each 'champ' might get to fight the real contendors and not cannon fodder that their promoter/tv company put in front of them to keep their fighter winning.

Most impressive pro debut?

with 4 "main" world title belts (and several nondescript ones) out there, it makes it easier to get a title shot. however it also means that several fighters get undeserved shots at the title, and titleholders rearly meat in unifacation matches. there is a lot of politics in the fight game, two world class fighters cant meet because they have contracts with rival tv networks, or they price themselves out of the match are two examples,also some of the better fighters could get overlooked in favour of the hyped up ones. we just have to grin and bear it. there are pros and cons, but far more cons than pros to having all these so called world champions floating about.how many current champions could you name off by heart without going on to the ring magazine website?


There Should be one belt per weight, the format today is just bogus.

You can get a title shot nowadays with only a dozen fights to your name.

It is too money driven and not about talent anymore

Annoying Kid?


Jake LaMotta against Gus Lesnevich,who would win this one?

1, the only belt i regocnise is the ring belt.

Why do people hate the current heavyweights?

There are far too many bets around. This devalues the real stars, when 4 or 5 organisations claim they have a champion. By having one belt, it means that the guy is the best. Plus too many belts means, mandatory challengers of low class. The guy Joe Calzaghe battered the other day. He was so outclassed, it was a joke and he could have got hurt. The British heavyweight scene is full of second rate lard butts who only get a title shot, because they are fighting another 2nd rate lard butt. Plus there are too many weights. Straw weight etc. Boxing weights should be done every 14IB or one Stone. Saying that most Heavyweights are in a weight of their own, pile of dump weight.

Here's a silly hypothetical fight, Tommy Morrison v.s. Tommy Gunn. I would ask about Tarver, but 6 is not out.

1 is better than 4 bcus that's the only belt i no!!!!!!!!!

What was Christy Martin's first big fight?

Well I think that having 4 major belts has made it hard to have a undisputed champion and not many boxers get that chance because it's so hard to make the unification fights most of the time, they all have a different top ten contenders list, I don't like all the stupid new titles like the IBO, WBU, WBF, IBA, and anymore of those ones because they don't really make you a world champion. The top belt is the WBC and then WBA and the IBF and then the WBO which I think is very underated, don't know why? I think that we need to have all 4 of those belts but we don't need any of the others, they also need to make it easier to have unification fights and more often as well.

What happened to Danny Williams?

It should be one just like the football (soccer) world champions. But the sport of boxing is run by greedy promotors. Anyone gets a shot at a title these days.

Henry Armstrong vs Roberto Duran. Who wins?

The four major belt sactions is cool. The others need to go. Just WBC, WBA, IBF, and WBO. It makes more better for unification fights. You can not get that no more with the background crap going on.

Who is your bet this coming rematch between Pacquiao & Morales?

1, for all the reasons previously listed, in other responses.

Ezzard Charles?

Definitley just 1 per weight this way the champion of the world would be the real champion and it would mean more, plus the fights might be a better standard for titles. ie. the last calzaghe fight for that money for a ticket and for it to be stopped in the 3rd round come on it was a title fight and there was no need to stop it that early (well thats my opiniton) if there was only 1 belt and it was harder to get a title fight then the standard would be better and the fights would be better.

Marvin hagler v Roy Jones Jr who wins?

well i think that a lot of "sports" fans, that's not boxing fans who are more informed, are utterly confused by it all. there are too many organisations, i think 2 or 3 would be ideal - that would create an opportunity for a unification but would still allow competition in each organisation

Where can I find listings for boxing events for 2007? Or what boxing events are happening in 2007?

It's a ridiculous situation to have 4 world champions. It devalues the noble art of boxing and it encourages the different champions to avoid fighting each other. They should all be forced to fight each other to decide who is the undisputed champion.

Who is going to win the fight between Oscar & Floyd?

i think that if a boxer holds more than one title they would have to defend both/all of them. this way all the titles slowly become unified and winning a title becomes more prestigious. there are too many titles for winning just one to have any meaning. on top of that there are so many boxers jumping weight class nowadays that you could end up fight a champ for the title who is overweight or unfit

What is a TKO in boxing?

Less Weights to start with, 4 belts per weight is ok with me but for gods sake, lets break the weight divisions themselves up into 10-14lb increments, instead of 4-5lb increments, in conclusion.... boxing is fast turning very commercial and political, borderline puss ***. Less weight divisions and if you are going to have 4 belts then dont make it next to impossible to obtain all 4 through politics!

Who wins the fight at the end of great white hype?

The current format is diluted. having 4 "champions" means having no real champion. It does make for big money fights to consolidate the division. I think this may be the real reason for the alphabet belts.

More Questions & Answers...
  • How do you get into the UFC?
  • Would using the following discription be correct in discribing an overhand right punch...?
  • A personal tribute from me to Santana D...?
  • Help im tryin to watch ricky hatton fight?
  • Which knockout of Roy Jones jr. was more spectacular?
  • Which boxer does Paulie Malignaggi most resemble (excluding Hector Camacho)?
  • Did manny pacquiao wins over eric morales at this rematch?
  • Speed and Explosiveness?
  • In boxing, do you have to side step whilst performing a weeve?
  • Any boxing coaches?
  • De la hoya vs. mayweather?

    This article contents is create by this website user, Sports1234.com doesn't promise its accuracy.
    Copyright 2007-2009 Sports1234.com     Contact us    Terms of Use