Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: PROPOSED WBC UNIFICATION RULE!
FightHype Community > BOXING HYPE > Boxing
blackbelt2003
I know a lot of people dog Jose Sulaiman, but he has been instrumental in shaping modern boxing, both the bad AND a lot of the good.


But here's an idea I've heard him mention before, and it looks as if they're giving it some thought (from a press release on 'genericandmostlydullboxingnewssite.com'):

A summit is proposed for the 2009 WBC convention in Jeju Island, South Korea concerning a proposed Universal champion. Under the idea of José Sulaimán, the organizations of the WBC, WBA, WBO and IBF would enter their respective champions into competition (semi-finals and finals) with one Universal champion rising to the top of the heap. The winner will be administered to by the sanctioning organization who's title he originally held. The losers will still retain their own original titles. Another plan for the 2009 convention is to invite broadcasters like HBO, Showtime, ESPN, Sky Sports and so on to create a dialog and thaw the frost between the sanctioning bodies and the networks.




Black
Big Slim Sweet
Sounds too good to be true. My hunch is it is.
Maxy
Great idea if it's true. Boxing needs a kick up the arse and this plan is very positive.
Jack 1000
It's a great proposed rule. I actually contacted the WBC about this very issue not too long ago. Glad to see this progress being made. It should be the goal of all boxing championship federations to begin this unification process. But at the same time, it encourages the different organizations to produce a single, culminating unified world boxing champion. This sets an example that all of boxing should follow.

Jack
Nay_Sayer
I don't think this is going to work....
D-MARV
I like it! Doubt it will happen but I like it!
JonnyBlaze
QUOTE(damarvelous1 @ Nov 6 2008, 05:39 PM) [snapback]409653[/snapback]
I like it! Doubt it will happen but I like it!

Exactly..It'd be real dope to have this happen but it most likely won't..The different organizations are horrible at dealing with each other...
blackbelt2003
The other thing I don't like is the statement that the losers of the tournament would get to keep their belts anyway...so what would it achieve?


Why WOULDN'T the organisation bodies want one guy to hold all the belts? Surely an undisputed champ would be a bigger draw, and therefore earn more sanctioning fees for them anyway?




Black
AussieLad
QUOTE(blackbelt2003 @ Nov 8 2008, 12:16 PM) [snapback]409841[/snapback]
The other thing I don't like is the statement that the losers of the tournament would get to keep their belts anyway...so what would it achieve?
Why WOULDN'T the organisation bodies want one guy to hold all the belts? Surely an undisputed champ would be a bigger draw, and therefore earn more sanctioning fees for them anyway?
Black


Nah, unless the guy is a draw already, unifying the belts would probably increase his payday somewhat, but they just dont want to have to split it 3 or 4 ways
D-MARV
These organizations are all about getting paid...
Jack 1000
QUOTE
The other thing I don't like is the statement that the losers of the tournament would get to keep their belts anyway...so what would it achieve?


I read that as well, I think it means that the organizations would poll together to create one "Undisputed Champion Belt" for each division where the WBA, WBC, and IBF titles are all on the line. (Currently there is no such belt for an undisputed champion.) If you win a bout sanctioned by all three organizations, you would get the Universal Belt.

My understanding is that title belts are like Olympic Medals, When you win them, you keep them. you can get them engraved, put wallet sized pictures on them, do what you want. When a champion wins a belt, the sanctioning bodies send or give you a brand new belt that you take with you. Boxing tradition says that the belt that is put on you when you win a world title or titles goes back to the former champion when the new champ gets his new belt.

In addition, begin stripped of a title does not mean that two big guys (like Blackbelt and Roll Deep) come from their gym with sanctioning body logos on them, and beat the fighter over the head for the belt and send it back to the sanctioning body! hahahaha. laugh.gif It just means that TITLE RECOGNITION IS REMOVED FROM THE CHAMPION BY THE ORGANIZATION. Belts you win are always yours.

Champions who have been STRIPPED of titles have worn their belts into the ring under protest. (They often get fined by the sanctioning body for doing this.) But I want to clarify how titles are won and what a title stripping entails.

So under this system, it would create a new Unified Belt for any contests in which WBC, WBA, and IBF sanctioning was all on the line.

Jack
blackbelt2003
QUOTE(Jack 1000 @ Nov 9 2008, 03:19 AM) [snapback]409895[/snapback]
I read that as well, I think it means that the organizations would poll together to create one "Undisputed Champion Belt" for each division where the WBA, WBC, and IBF titles are all on the line. (Currently there is no such belt for an undisputed champion.) If you win a bout sanctioned by all three organizations, you would get the Universal Belt.

My understanding is that title belts are like Olympic Medals, When you win them, you keep them. you can get them engraved, put wallet sized pictures on them, do what you want. When a champion wins a belt, the sanctioning bodies send or give you a brand new belt that you take with you. Boxing tradition says that the belt that is put on you when you win a world title or titles goes back to the former champion when the new champ gets his new belt.

In addition, begin stripped of a title does not mean that two big guys (like Blackbelt and Roll Deep) come from their gym with sanctioning body logos on them, and beat the fighter over the head for the belt and send it back to the sanctioning body! hahahaha. laugh.gif It just means that TITLE RECOGNITION IS REMOVED FROM THE CHAMPION BY THE ORGANIZATION. Belts you win are always yours.

Champions who have been STRIPPED of titles have worn their belts into the ring under protest. (They often get fined by the sanctioning body for doing this.) But I want to clarify how titles are won and what a title stripping entails.

So under this system, it would create a new Unified Belt for any contests in which WBC, WBA, and IBF sanctioning was all on the line.

Jack


Yeah, I got all that Jack, but what I meant is how it would suck if, say, Antonio Margarito unified the welterweight division but then Josh Clottey is reinstated as IBF champ and Andre Berto as WBC champ.

Does it all just go back to how it was before the tournament, or will the sanctioning boys have an undisputed belt? If they do, that would work. You could just disregard the regular titlists if there is an undisputed champion.



Black
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.