Get rid of the alphabet boys by Craig MacKay Feb 11th 2008

Despite boxing undergoing somewhat of resurgence of late, there are still many people put off by the confusing nature of boxing. In a sport where the goal is to be the world champion of your chosen weight, surely everyone should know who the world champion is. Of course in boxing, there isn't one world champion per weight, there are many. Different organizations all have their own belts and their own world champion, the four main organisations being the WBC, WBA, IBF and WBO. Four world champs may be confusing enough for some, but then we can add the WBU, IBO and IBA among others. The “lesser” belts such as the WBU and IBA are often referred to as alphabet titles and are not given much credence by the informed boxing fan but how on earth is a casual fan meant to know who is the best in each division? Remember this is before we even consider European, Commonwealth, national and regional titles! Each of the organisations rank boxers themselves and this can often be as much about politics as the boxers records. Certain promoters seem to prefer their boxers to fight for specific titles, as witnessed by the number of Sports Network fighters going down the WBO and WBU 'routes' to a world title. The WBC and WBA titles are widely believed to be the “best” titles to hold and that the fighters holding these belts are the true world champions. However it appears that often the boxer holding the belt makes it prestigious rather than the other way round. Ricky Hatton held the WBU title from 2001-2005 and was considered to be one of the very best in the division. Joe Calzaghe has held the WBO belt for ten years and no-one can argue that he is not the best super-middleweight in the world. Friends of mine, who watched the Michael Jennings-Ross Minter bout on the Amir Khan Gary St. Clair undercard were asking me, how come they hadn't heard of Michael Jennings if he was a world champion. Trying to explain that he was the WBU champion, which didn't mean he was the “real” world champion confused me, never mind them! This really made me think that if boxing wants to broaden its appeal then something must be done to rectify this ludicrous situation. It is all well and good saying, that's just the way it is and that the alphabet titles are here to stay whether we like it or not, but that achieves nothing apart from the alienation of potential fans. I am not alone in criticising the situation in which boxing finds itself. It is easy for me to criticise but a lot harder to offer alternative and realistic options, but that's exactly what I will attempt to do. I believe that boxing can learn a lot from MMA and, wait for it….. the professional wrestling industry! I watch MMA when I can, I'm not a big fan and don't know a lot of the fighters. MMA like boxing has different organizations but unlike boxing the competitors do not generally compete against fighters from other organizations. This poses its own and some would say far bigger problems, unless a fighter moves between organizations he will never have the opportunity to fight everyone. However there is one MMA organization that stands out as far and away the most popular organization within the sport. The organization, of course, is the UFC and within the UFC there is one world champion at each weight. As the UFC is so popular, the best MMA fighters tend to fight in the UFC and the world championship is becoming gradually recognised as the title that any MMA fighter wants to hold. The success the UFC has achieved is down to there being one world champion. Even if I do not know who the fighters are, if I see a world title fight in the UFC, immediately the fight becomes interesting. These are two fighters competing to be the best in the world, something which Jennings v Minter was not, despite the belt up for grabs. Fans can relate to this, whether they are lifelong fans or fans that watch the occasional bout when they are flicking through TV channels. Seeing a boxer holding a belt on the way to the ring is meaningless to your average sports fan, since nearly every fight they watch has one boxer with a title of some description. I am not proposing that we scrap European, national and regional titles. They have their place in the sport and offer a great incentive for talented boxers that are making their way up the rankings, or for those that are never going to have a chance to be a world champion. What I do suggest is that there is one sole belt for the world champion and one organization that rank the fighters. How this will be achieved, unfortunately I don't know, but what I do know is that if it doesn't happen, boxing is missing an opportunity to become a sport with a far bigger mass appeal. One world title will also prevent fighters “ducking” each other. If you want to win the world title then you will have to fight the best, there will be no chance to plot the path of least resistance to a world title. The world champion will be the man who beat the best, exactly what a world champion should be! So what exactly do I think professional wrestling can offer? It's true that wrestling is half way between sport and pantomime but one look at the viewing figures and full arenas that it attracts tells you it must be doing something well. What wrestling does that boxing does not is that the best (or most popular) wrestlers are pitted against each other by the management on a regular basis. Each PPV event features a main event, usually for a world title as in boxing but also an undercard full of the rest of the best fighter against each other. Boxing on the other hand often features a fight for one of the world titles and maybe one or two undercard fights that the casual fan is interested in watching. I have no problem with this, I love seeing fighters for the first time make a name for themselves on an undercard, nobody can start their career by headlining cards. If there is one organization and one world champion, why can they not have one card per year where promoters have no say in who fights who – the organization sets bouts and the undercard is packed full of top quality fighters fighting for world titles. Everyone with even a casual interest in boxing would want to watch that night. The publicity an event like that would generate would create record viewing figures and introduce people to boxing that may never have considered watching it before. Most boxers would be delighted that promoter politics are put to one side and that they get the fight they really want without months of protracted negations. Of course you may well read this, think it's a nice idea but that I am living in a fantasy world. I am however a great believer that if people want something to be done and enough people voice their concerns then the people with the power will eventually have to take notice.

Go back Comment on this article | Send to a friend | Print

Alphabet Boys Feb 13th 2008, 06:48:06 by steve_wellings Good article Craig. This is a subject that has long infuriated Boxing fans and i have done some in depth research into some of these organisations and they stink of chancers trying to make a quick buck! Have you seen the sanctioning fees of the IBE?! But as colin c mentions, quite rightly....are the so called major, credible bodies really any better? The answer would probably be no.   Alphabet boys Feb 11th 2008, 14:24:17 by colin c I started getting into boxing in the mid 1980's. The WBC, WBA and IBF were established. Then the WBO were formed. I recall Mike Tyson being the undisputed champ, and then Fransesco Damiani took the bogus WBO belt and the whole of boxing derided him, and the rest of the media simply ignored him. 20 years on the WBO is well established and the original sanctioning bodies are going through some serious credibility issues themselves. The WBC have an interim champ and an emiritus champ, the IBF for some reason keep their number 1 ranking vacant and therefore their number 2 is the defacto number 1. The WBA have a Super Champion whenever their belt holder unifies. Imagine how Carl the truth Williams feels as he would have been WBA champ during Tyson's reign as Tyson would have been super champion.