More titles, or no belts at all - what is the way forward?

I am sure like a lot of others, I winced when watching post-bout interview on ITV4 after the WBU welterweight title bout between Michael Jennings (left) and Ross Minter. It had been a great domestic scrap, Minter's aggressive style mixing well with the boxing skills on the move of Jennings. After, the pair were particularly respectful to each other and Minter said he knew it would be tough because Jennings was "a world champion". Some may put the pair up for the British Boxing Board of Control's sportsmanship award, others would want Minter up before the Board on a charge of bringing the sport into disrepute.

Because Jennings, of course, is not a world champion, he is a WBU champion, which is a very different thing. The WBU may call him a world champion, but so what? In a division as strong as welterweight, this seems a particular crime. There was a time when the WBU, soon after its conception, could count the likes of George Foreman, Hasim Rahman, James Toney and Silvio Branco as its champions. Now it can't.

There are currently four WBU champions - Gary Lockett at middleweight, Jennings at welterweight, Lee McAllister at lightweight and Derry Mathews at featherweight - all the other titles are vacant or inactive. All their champions are British, indeed the last overseas boxer to contest one of their title was Angel Hugo Ramirez, an Argentinian based in Spain, who got the rough end of a poor-looking decision against Graham Earl for the vacant lightweight title in 2006. It has been more than four years since one of their "world titles" has been contested outside the United Kingdom. I always laugh when I remember Ricky Hatton referring to his bout with Kostya Tszyu as a unification bout (as if Tszyu had any interest in winning the WBU title!)

If there was ever a definitive low-point in the history of boxing, my bet would be that it was at the Goresbrook Leisure Centre, Dagenham, on December 8, 2001, when Dominic Negus faced Eddie Knight for something called the WBU Continental super-cruiserweight title. No disrespect to the boxers involved but... WBU continental??? super-cruiserweight???

But fringe titles - whether they be WBU, WBF, GBU, IBA, British masters, or even IBO - have always essentially been a bargaining chip in the battle for power in the sport between promoters and the governing bodies. If a promoter or boxer doesn't like the orders coming down, screw them, we'll fight for our own belt. And there is no reason to say why any of the above bodies are run any worse than the likes of the IBF, which has a particularly chequered history, for instance. What they do is cloud the waters for the fans.

As a general rule, the strength of a governing body should not be rated merely by whom their best champion is, but by their worst champion. It's all very easy sending some big name a belt and saying they are happy to recognise him whoever he wants to face, it's a bit more difficult to extract a sanctioning fee from some light-flyweights.

Many promoters argue that they need titles to help them sell tickets, hence British Masters titles, which I was told once was generally worth about £1,000 per fight to the champion - there was recently something called the International Masters title up for grabs.

But now the complete opposite has happened in the United States, with big fights taking place without any titles - fringe or otherwise - up for grabs. This weekend there is a rematch of the fantastic world middleweight title fight between Kelly Pavlik and Jermain Taylor, only it is happening at the super-middleweight limit with no titles on the line. Which begs the question: does it even matter?

In April Joe Calzaghe challenges Bernard Hopkins for The Ring magazine world light-heavyweight title. Hopkins claimed this title by beating Antonio Tarver two years ago and has defended it once, against Ronald "Winky" Wright in a match that was made at 12st 2lb (5lb below the light-heavyweight limit). As The Ring champion, there is no pressure for Hopkins to face any legitimate challengers - he either loses the title in the ring or retires. To make matters even more cloudy, The Ring was bought recently by Golden Boy, the promotional company that Hopkins is a partner in.

So too many titles doesn't work, no titles doesn't work. It seems the only way forward is for the main governing bodies to be more democratic, and to put the other champions in a position of mandatory contender to force unification matches. I've always felt the first body to do this could clean up.

Television companies restrict their title fights to one within a pyramid structure that stops titles merely becoming alternatives for British titles. But this comes down to the BBBC having more power as well, to stop certain titles being wrapped up by individual promoters. The recent Amir Khan-Jon Thaxton purse bid ended up becoming a farce, because Khan had already announced he was boxing in February and Thaxton said he would not be ready in time.

Of course, that's all fantasy, because it won't happen. If one governing body bit the dust or merged, there would soon be another to step up. I've always preferred a ten or eight-rounder to some dumb belt, but titles are not the only way to build interest.

I understand that Matchroom (who have brought us plenty of fringe belts in the past) have a  heavyweight tournament in the works. The event would feature eight boxers in a knockout (literally) series of bouts, with quarter-finals, semi-finals and final all on the same night. The winner, they hope, will emerge as a hot new prospect. I certainly hope it works for them, because we don't want to go back to the days of the WBU continental super-cruiserweights.

Comments

[Ron Lewis]

It was Taylor who demanded the rematch 166lb, as he claimed he struggled at the weight. Obviously the resuly means we don't have to worry about a third fight.

[Dave Amos]

A quick pointer Ron. The Pavlik-Taylor rematch is not at super middleweight, but at a catchweight of 166 pounds. Both have weighed in at 164, which does make you wonder what the point was of not just having a rematch for the titles Pavlik won last year. It seems very political, and certainly in favour of Pavlik. If Taylor wins he'll probably go into the final fight of a trilogy, needing to beat a man he's just beaten in order to win his belts back. Lose and it may be a very long road back. On the other hand Pavlik can be beaten and he'll still be middleweight world champion.