Boxing being ruined and corrupted

John Wilkinson

WBO WBC IBF WBA; no duel/tri
@White
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
106
Reaction score
0
By: Overgoverance. Add to that problem a newer one when some of the FIRST &MAJOR FOUR [WBO WBC IBF WBA] begin a duel and tri championship within the single organization. And....I'm not certain which group(s) steer clear there but...the WBA for -1- is very infamous for the such. And..it cause a BAD NAME for whole of the bunch.
Now..the duel and tri situation does NOT fool me. What it does do is cause confusion and that messes REAL GOOD with the crossover concept. What it is is it is a "super rating". But...calling three champs per a single weight bracket within a single entity.....get the picture please!
In March/2007 I founded the United WBC WBA IBF WBO (dash) "the second echelon theory" [UWBCAFO-I]. Counting the '2e' as having a value of (approx.) FIVE USA STATES. Echelons don't mix (WHY? WHY the first four ALLOW '2e' potentials mix?? Wlad previously & thru at least 13 HVY.Wt. defenses. Tripple G/Gennady Golovkin, now).
Too..we disqualify the 'C' weight div temporarily. Will LIKE to see a RE-SET at 190/195 champions choice/ All Vacs 190.
All 'C' boxers aught consider themselves 'H' in mean time. Like to match-up by the SZ? Then by all means do just that.
This work is in the men's league ONLY and....effects only "world" titles. 1) I simply don't have the same expertise with the female side. (Thus, I would be wrong to try and "CALL IT"). -&-..... The second of this means we do not draw any lines against "Intercontinental" or such championships "mixing". WBF & WBO go right ahead! But, "world"...come TO PLEASE!
Boxing never needed FOUR GROUPS. Thus, certain we don't need to ADD ON YET AGAIN! [The IBO knew that their already was a over-goverance problem. When you hear some junk defend them try and find out if the reason might be because they at one point employeed for them! And..the problem lot bigger than the IBO only. Of course!]
If an entity puts out a RATING w/o pronouncing their own CHAMPS that is always a good thing so long as the committee knows their poop! But once the WORLD TITLE starts breaking-up/multiplying we are messing with authentic interest.
I am involved with the sport 50 years and I very well know my subject.
 
Last edited:
I read all of that, and i barely understood anything you're saying.
 
By: Overgoverance. Add to that problem a newer one when some of the FIRST &MAJOR FOUR [WBO WBC IBF WBA] begin a duel and tri championship within the single organization. And....I'm not certain which group(s) steer clear there but...the WBA for -1- is very infamous for the such. And..it cause a BAD NAME for whole of the bunch.
Now..the duel and tri situation does NOT fool me. What it does do is cause confusion and that messes REAL GOOD with the crossover concept. What it is is it is a "super rating". But...calling three champs per a single weight bracket within a single entity.....get the picture please!
In March/2007 I founded the United WBC WBA IBF WBO (dash) "the second echelon theory" [UWBCAFO-I]. Counting the '2e' as having a value of (approx.) FIVE USA STATES. Echelons don't mix (WHY? WHY the first four ALLOW '2e' potentials mix?? Wlad previously & thru at least 13 HVY.Wt. defenses. Tripple G/Gennady Golovkin, now).
Too..we disqualify the 'C' weight div temporarily. Will LIKE to see a RE-SET at 190/195 champions choice/ All Vacs 190.
All 'C' boxers aught consider themselves 'H' in mean time. Like to match-up by the SZ? Then by all means do just that.
This work is in the men's league ONLY and....effects only "world" titles. 1) I simply don't have the same expertise with the female side. (Thus, I would be wrong to try and "CALL IT"). -&-..... The second of this means we do not draw any lines against "Intercontinental" or such championships "mixing". WBF & WBO go right ahead! But, "world"...come TO PLEASE!
Boxing never needed FOUR GROUPS. Thus, certain we don't need to ADD ON YET AGAIN! [The IBO knew that their already was a over-goverance problem. When you hear some junk defend them try and find out if the reason might be because they at one point employeed for them! And..the problem lot bigger than the IBO only. Of course!]
If an entity puts out a RATING w/o pronouncing their own CHAMPS that is always a good thing so long as the committee knows their poop! But once the WORLD TITLE stars breaking-up/multiplying we are messing with authentic interest.
I am involved with the sport 50 years and I very well know my subject.

I personally like "the third echelon theory".
It has more, echelon type theory stuff in it. More echelonish, if you will.
 
Can you get back when you're sobered up?
 
The problem isn't all the belts. There have been great eras with multiple belts.

The problem is the promotional wars and lack of cross promotional fights that we get.
 
The problem isn't all the belts. There have been great eras with multiple belts.

The problem is the promotional wars and lack of cross promotional fights that we get.
I think all the belts are a huge problem with casuals. That's what keeps it out of mainstream. The general public wants something that is easy to follow and has an absolute winner and champion. That's why the UFC's model caught on to so many casuals pretty fast. Its simplified. However, lately with adding weight classes and all the interim belt nonsense it may hurt them in the long run. Fans want to know who the best is. They want to feel like they know the sport. It honestly complicates who actually is the best. It minimizes the value of a championship fight or world title. You already have to deal with that with the weight classes. Why complicate it further?

The crazy thing is the orgs could actually come together and organize it like leagues and divisions and it would probably help. But the promoters and networks would just ruin it by being impossible to work with.
 
I think all the belts are a huge problem with casuals. That's what keeps it out of mainstream. The general public wants something that is easy to follow and has an absolute winner and champion. That's why the UFC's model caught on to so many casuals pretty fast. Its simplified. However, lately with adding weight classes and all the interim belt nonsense it may hurt them in the long run. Fans want to know who the best is. They want to feel like they know the sport. It honestly complicates who actually is the best. It minimizes the value of a championship fight or world title. You already have to deal with that with the weight classes. Why complicate it further?

The crazy thing is the orgs could actually come together and organize it like leagues and divisions and it would probably help. But the promoters and networks would just ruin it by being impossible to work with.
i don't think nor feel it's the belts, look no further than the U.K. They are working with the same model yet are flourishing

Its an accessible promotor that is the face and that makes fun fights and makes them into events

Fans care less about belts and more about connection
 
i don't think nor feel it's the belts, look no further than the U.K. They are working with the same model yet are flourishing

Its an accessible promotor that is the face and that makes fun fights and makes them into events

Fans care less about belts and more about
i don't think nor feel it's the belts, look no further than the U.K. They are working with the same model yet are flourishing

Its an accessible promotor that is the face and that makes fun fights and makes them into events

Fans care less about belts and more about connection
Thats one market that its always thrived in...What about the hundreds of others? Its a factor. Especially for the American market. One of the biggest things I hear from casuals is "there are so many champs but i cant keep track of who is the real champ."
 
Last edited:
WeeklySportsMeme's Thank YOU for your seriousness. Was beginning to think I may be entering a WAR against nonsense talkers.
What I have outlined IS the only way for Boxing to recover about w/all this.
Anyone who understands the past history would be on my side about all of this.
For any and all reading who shall take the matter seriously to heart.. Know that back in the late 80's and when Carlos Palomino/Pipino Cuevas ruled at Welterweight we have but two organizations. WBC & WBA.
Bob Lees IBF was group three. They found the nich rather "easily". Next came WBO. "Heartache" their coming up. Today, I give it to them. The IBO is EFFECTIVELY Group-five. We are badly deluting. Wait, wait..IBO WBF WBU IBC WBB,,wait, their are more.
You with your "Third Echelon" you have nothing better to do with your time than PLAY THE JOKER? 1 & 2 also you don't contribute.
At the level of the Organizations themselves..the case IS that EVERYONE WANTS TO BE KING OF THE HILL. The IBO (and the OTHERS) don't have enough sense on their own to do what is really needed: reduce. (To bring Truth in advertising forward.....)
Ring magazine formerly under Nigel Collins one part of this "back story".
 
By: Overgoverance. Add to that problem a newer one when some of the FIRST &MAJOR FOUR [WBO WBC IBF WBA] begin a duel and tri championship within the single organization. And....I'm not certain which group(s) steer clear there but...the WBA for -1- is very infamous for the such. And..it cause a BAD NAME for whole of the bunch.
Now..the duel and tri situation does NOT fool me. What it does do is cause confusion and that messes REAL GOOD with the crossover concept. What it is is it is a "super rating". But...calling three champs per a single weight bracket within a single entity.....get the picture please!
In March/2007 I founded the United WBC WBA IBF WBO (dash) "the second echelon theory" [UWBCAFO-I]. Counting the '2e' as having a value of (approx.) FIVE USA STATES. Echelons don't mix (WHY? WHY the first four ALLOW '2e' potentials mix?? Wlad previously & thru at least 13 HVY.Wt. defenses. Tripple G/Gennady Golovkin, now).
Too..we disqualify the 'C' weight div temporarily. Will LIKE to see a RE-SET at 190/195 champions choice/ All Vacs 190.
All 'C' boxers aught consider themselves 'H' in mean time. Like to match-up by the SZ? Then by all means do just that.
This work is in the men's league ONLY and....effects only "world" titles. 1) I simply don't have the same expertise with the female side. (Thus, I would be wrong to try and "CALL IT"). -&-..... The second of this means we do not draw any lines against "Intercontinental" or such championships "mixing". WBF & WBO go right ahead! But, "world"...come TO PLEASE!
Boxing never needed FOUR GROUPS. Thus, certain we don't need to ADD ON YET AGAIN! [The IBO knew that their already was a over-goverance problem. When you hear some junk defend them try and find out if the reason might be because they at one point employeed for them! And..the problem lot bigger than the IBO only. Of course!]
If an entity puts out a RATING w/o pronouncing their own CHAMPS that is always a good thing so long as the committee knows their poop! But once the WORLD TITLE stars breaking-up/multiplying we are messing with authentic interest.
I am involved with the sport 50 years and I very well know my subject.

timecube.jpg


Also, more to the point, you don't happen to have an ongoing issue involving, say, a bus company, do you?

You seem strangely familiar.
 
Mexico , Germany and to extent Japan

What all of them have in common is active gross roots Promotions

Fights that are actual events and fun fights

The bar owners who put the fights in the EEUU all ask who the popular guy is
Not who is he legit champ

I truly feel it's about connecting with the customer in this case the fans


Danny Garcia is a great example of connecting with the fans

He always has tons of fans at any place he goes to "open"

Very popular


@wkly
 
I think all the belts are a huge problem with casuals. That's what keeps it out of mainstream. The general public wants something that is easy to follow and has an absolute winner and champion. That's why the UFC's model caught on to so many casuals pretty fast. Its simplified. However, lately with adding weight classes and all the interim belt nonsense it may hurt them in the long run. Fans want to know who the best is. They want to feel like they know the sport. It honestly complicates who actually is the best. It minimizes the value of a championship fight or world title. You already have to deal with that with the weight classes. Why complicate it further?

The crazy thing is the orgs could actually come together and organize it like leagues and divisions and it would probably help. But the promoters and networks would just ruin it by being impossible to work with.


There are pros and cons with having multiple belts.

One thing you overlook, but the people in the industry know too well. As a sport, and especially one that hopes to keep a global reach. Multiple belts means champions from every region. For every true champ from the US or Mexico, there's a paper champ in Central-Asia or Africa. It allows people from other countries to claim champions and for events being broadcast locally and put on fights locally. It helps the sport grow. For the 10 paper champs from Kazakhstan, we finally have one undisputed champion in GGG, who himself first won an IBO belt btw.

Its the same reason there's so many lower weight-classes, even though weight classes below WW get no attention in North America and Europe. Champions from Thailand, Japan and Latin America are dominating those lower weights and have world champions.

And of course, the obvious answer which we all know, multiple belts and numerous weight-classes mean the sanctioning bodies have several streams of revenue.




The one thing that doesn't make sense is WBA super/regular champions, and WBC silver titles. I can't fathom why WBA would have 2 champions, or why WBC has a silver belt ("champion" of what exactly?), and a silver International belt to go along with their regular International belt.

As for the IBO and WBO, as fans we'd like to see titles kept to a minimum. But this is the free-market and free movement. Any person can create their own org and their own titles. There's nothing anyone can do about it, unless you want the government to step in and that would be corrupt/tyrannical to prevent one group from organizing in favor of another group.
 
Mexico , Germany and to extent Japan

What all of them have in common is active gross roots Promotions

Fights that are actual events and fun fights

The bar owners who put the fights in the EEUU all ask who the popular guy is
Not who is he legit champ

I truly feel it's about connecting with the customer in this case the fans


Danny Garcia is a great example of connecting with the fans

He always has tons of fans at any place he goes to "open"

Very popular


@wkly
Those are the national & ethnic appeal that fighters always going to draw.
Complicating a sport is never going to help it.
I think you are looking at it like guys like Danny Garcia are big in the boxing world.....or big comparatively to other boxers

Some people want boxings biggest names to get more coverage and recognition mainstream wise. So their is more of a demand for better fights
 
There are pros and cons with having multiple belts.

One thing you overlook, but the people in the industry know too well. As a sport, and especially one that hopes to keep a global reach. Multiple belts means champions from every region. For every true champ from the US or Mexico, there's a paper champ in Central-Asia or Africa. It allows people from other countries to claim champions and for events being broadcast locally and put on fights locally. It helps the sport grow. For the 10 paper champs from Kazakhstan, we finally have one undisputed champion in GGG, who himself first won an IBO belt btw.

Its the same reason there's so many lower weight-classes, even though weight classes below WW get no attention in North America and Europe. Champions from Thailand, Japan and Latin America are dominating those lower weights and have world champions.

And of course, the obvious answer which we all know, multiple belts and numerous weight-classes mean the sanctioning bodies have several streams of revenue.




The one thing that doesn't make sense is WBA super/regular champions, and WBC silver titles. I can't fathom why WBA would have 2 champions, or why WBC has a silver belt ("champion" of what exactly?), and a silver International belt to go along with their regular International belt.

As for the IBO and WBO, as fans we'd like to see titles kept to a minimum. But this is the free-market and free movement. Any person can create their own org and their own titles. There's nothing anyone can do about it, unless you want the government to step in and that would be corrupt/tyrannical to prevent one group from organizing in favor of another group.
Its not so much as failed to mention as it is nobody has time to decipher or come up with the subjective meaning for pointless titles.
At some point it becomes counter productive and lessens your top level product.
Regional titles make sense and should be advertised and titled as just that.
Its like trying to swim up stream.
Its a fractured sport. You can not convince me that having it more organized under a larger tent would not help the sport from a fans perspective.
Again what in the world would be wrong with the best guys actually fighting the best guys for what was considered the ultimate belt.
The GGG example kind of proves the point for the other side. Lol Exactly hes WELL past a regional level. Has been for a while. Been trying to unify the belts for his division but its been a struggle. He cant get a fight with the other top guy at the weight.
 
Its not so much as failed to mention as it is nobody has time to decipher or come up with the subjective meaning for pointless titles.
At some point it becomes counter productive and lessens your top level product.
Regional titles make sense and should be advertised and titled as just that.
Its like trying to swim up stream.
Its a fractured sport. You can not convince me that having it more organized under a larger tent would not help the sport from a fans perspective.
Again what in the world would be wrong with the best guys actually fighting the best guys for what was considered the ultimate belt.
The GGG example kind of proves the point for the other side. Lol Exactly hes WELL past a regional level. Has been for a while. Been trying to unify the belts for his division but its been a struggle. He cant get a fight with the other top guy at the weight.


As a fan I agree with you 100%. But i just pointed out the actual & economic reasons why there are so many belts.

I think it would be great if there could be regional belts, and maybe 1 or 2 world belts. But it just won't happen, you can't stop someone else from starting their own org and award their own titles. It'll just happen all over again. The UFC and MMA has the luxury of being a league system, and in many ways that's illegal in boxing.

There are probably 3x as many regional belts than world belts. And each world body has their own version or affiliated regional body, plus the independent regional bodies. If we could have regional belts, with the best boxers than moving on to world, that would be awesome but its a pipe dream.
 
Those are the national & ethnic appeal that fighters always going to draw.
Complicating a sport is never going to help it.
I think you are looking at it like guys like Danny Garcia are big in the boxing world.....or big comparatively to other boxers

Some people want boxings biggest names to get more coverage and recognition mainstream wise. So their is more of a demand for better fights
I see you are looking at it from a EEUU centric point of view

People like Canelo and triple GGG are pretty mainstream for a niche sport in the EEUU

Are you saying you want boxing to be mainstream and have multiple mainstream stars in EEUU

What era can you reference where this was happing in the EEUU
 
As a fan I agree with you 100%. But i just pointed out the actual & economic reasons why there are so many belts.

I think it would be great if there could be regional belts, and maybe 1 or 2 world belts. But it just won't happen, you can't stop someone else from starting their own org and award their own titles. It'll just happen all over again. The UFC and MMA has the luxury of being a league system, and in many ways that's illegal in boxing.

There are probably 3x as many regional belts than world belts. And each world body has their own version or affiliated regional body, plus the independent regional bodies. If we could have regional belts, with the best boxers than moving on to world, that would be awesome but its a pipe dream.
I get what you're saying. It may happen one day. Eventually they will have to parody the model of the other things that are taking their space. You can already see that some promoters are actually putting together WHOLE cards now instead of the garbage they got away with before
 
I see you are looking at it from a EEUU centric point of view

People like Canelo and triple GGG are pretty mainstream for a niche sport in the EEUU

Are you saying you want boxing to be mainstream and have multiple mainstream stars in EEUU

What era can you reference where this was happing in the EEUU
That would be incorrect on a majority of what you're saying.
Im saying the T.S. has a point. I think that the best fights dont get made in a reasonable time with boxing. Its an expensive sport to follow comparatively. The cards have sucked for a long time even with the big fights. Yes i think being more mainstream would help. I also think a lot of the problems are because its fractured sport at every level.
Why would i have to reference an era?
 
Back
Top