Boxing Forum - Boxing Discussion Forums banner

Alphabet belts?

4K views 46 replies 12 participants last post by  prettyboywho 
#1 ·
What exaclty are they? :confused:

I've heard the term used but didn't know what it meant :eek:

While we're on the subject anyone fancy doing a beginners guide to understanding the belts maybe :D
 
#3 ·
I think those alphabet belts suck, i think there should be just one MAIN title in each division like it used to be.

It sucks when fighters cant fight the best cause they have to fight some nobodys cause they are the mandatory challanger or whatever and if they dont fight them they will have their title stripped away from them, it sucks!
 
#5 ·
Brutus said:
I think those alphabet belts suck, i think there should be just one MAIN title in each division like it used to be.

It sucks when fighters cant fight the best cause they have to fight some nobodys cause they are the mandatory challanger or whatever and if they dont fight them they will have their title stripped away from them, it sucks!
That mando fought his way to that position and had to win to get a shot at the title. I like this better over the RM with no mandos and only pointless big money fights. Defend or vacate no picking and choosing easy fights for big money.
 
#6 ·
WBC = World Boxing Council (its the original and the most respected)
WBA = World Boxing Association
WBO = World Boxing Organization
IBF = International Boxing Federation
IBO = International Boxing Organization

The WBC is the true belt, of course the lineal champ is the true champ though.
 
#13 ·
never really seen the IBO as a recognized belt before!

it's hard to say which body has the true champions, there are great boxers in WBC, WBA, WBO, and IBF, the nearest to true champion status id say is the ring belts.

List of current world boxing champions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

look at the lists, the ring is nearly accurate in all weight categories, Hopkins, Calzaghe, Hatton, Mayweather, Pavlik, Casamayor and Vazquez.

Heavyweight is vacant, so is most of the lower weight categories which hasnt got a lot of meaning to them.

Haye is controversial imo, Cunningham and Maccarinelli especially have valid claims on that belt
 
#16 ·
TysonJones said:
The ring rankings are accurate but its not the most publicized belt. The wbc is. In all honesty, The most recognized champ is the one with the most belts.
that's the best possible way of defining a real champion! that covers most of it! you can't cover it all until you get one champ for every weight class
 
#18 ·
Also politics (*cough* Don King *cough*) has a lot to do with it. If a promoter can have 4 different champs fighting at once, all making him millions, why would he let them unify and have only 1 making millions? The only reason Tyson unifyed is because he was so exciting and could make as much as 4 champs because of his style.
 
#19 ·
bill1234 said:
WBC = World Boxing Council (its the original and the most respected)
WBA = World Boxing Association
WBO = World Boxing Organization
IBF = International Boxing Federation
IBO = International Boxing Organization

The WBC is the true belt, of course the lineal champ is the true champ though.
the wba is the original, the wbc is more reconised though.

the wbc broke away from the wba around 65 i think.
 
#21 ·
TysonJones said:
wbc world boxing council
wba world boxing association
wbo world boxing organization
ibf international boxing federation


Alphabet belts..........there are plenty more, every sanctioning body as one.
I thought that's what they might be, cheers for clearing that up.

Are the ring and lonsdale belts done on a different criteria to these then?
 
#22 ·
spiderbloke said:
I thought that's what they might be, cheers for clearing that up.

Are the ring and lonsdale belts done on a different criteria to these then?
Sense we have the ABC titles I think that 95% of the boxing world reconizes the ring champ as the over all champ. At least thats how I see it.
 
#25 ·
prettyboywho said:
Yea the only thing that over rides the ring champ is if someone has at least 3 major belts like the WBC, WBA, and IBF.
sup ron, the ring champ is above all, it dont matter if someone has the wbc,wba,ibf,wbo. the ring champ would still be considered the liner guy in the division.

just like if chad dawson went out and won another 2 or 3 titles next year, hopkins would still be considered the man untill he's beaten.
 
#26 · (Edited)
spiderbloke said:
I thought that's what they might be, cheers for clearing that up.

Are the ring and lonsdale belts done on a different criteria to these then?
the lonsdale belt is the british champion SB, thats a major title in britain only.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top