WBA rulez - how many superchampions at the same time?

[Stinky gloves]

Lets assume WBA champion unify the title with say WBO then the champion is
nominated a superchampion and the new regular WBA champion is on his way.

However what if the new regular champion unify the title with IBF and the another
one with WBC the same year.

Does they have three superchampions + of course the additional 4th regular one?

[justaboxingfan]

Thats a good question. while we;re on the topic can someone plz explain how the WBA can have more than one champ; for example both Kessler and Mundine are WBA super middleweight champions. How can this be??

[4Rounder]

Just another scheme to suck in more title fees from the fighters with their WBA belts.

Jermain Taylor was turned into the WBA superchampion for being the unified belt holder and Felix Sturm was later awarded the regular WBA Championship.

How about this one, Juan Manuel Marquez became the WBA Super Champion when he unified with the IBF. Because of this Chris John from Indonesia was awarded the WBA Regular belt. When Marquez refused to take a bullshit defence he was stripped of his super champ belt and did not receive the regular belt back and became beltless. Gotta love that WBA eh.

I think the WBA is the worst of the sanctioning bodies at this point. If what you said happened they would probably call the new unified belt holders something like Interim or call the first who unified the Ultra champ or some crap like that to get as much money as they can.

[chrisroxthem]

i fucking hate that whole super champ bullshit. like the title belts arent already diluted enough when we get a unified champ who actually can legitimately call himself the champion of the world they go and pull that bullshit. its all so they can sell more tickets and get more ratings for more "title fights" its fucking rediculous

[justaboxingfan]

Thats retarded. I've never really liked having more than 3 belts but the more I watch boxing it seems as though another abc title belt has been created. The funniest one I've seen was the WBC 'Youth' belt, what does that mean anyway; you turned pro but your still not a real pro?? (what about tyson 20, ali 22, vargas 21) imagine being the North American Boxing Council Federation middleweight Interim Youth Champion or NABCF:nut ; I one don't think they have this yet but we're probably not too far:patsch

[Farmboxer]

Boxing orgs make me puke!

[NBT]

However what if the new regular champion unify the title with IBF and the another one with WBC the same year.

Does they have three superchampions + of course the additional 4th regular one?
No, the fight wouldn't be sanctioned. The "regular beltholder" isn't allowed to unify, if he fights for another belt he will be stripped of the WBA paper title.

[Brickhaus]

You know, despite what some writers would have you believe, there IS actually a legitimate reason for having superchampions. Basically, without superchampions, there would never be a way to unify the belts, because mandatories would come up too quickly to take down any of the other champions. Superchampions get twice as long to face their mandatories (the regular champs), so they can go after other beltholders instead. Whether you think unification of the belts is a valid exercise is another story, but I can see why they do it, other than collection of additional sanctioning fees.

[NBT]

You know, despite what some writers would have you believe, there IS actually a legitimate reason for having superchampions. Basically, without superchampions, there would never be a way to unify the belts, because mandatories would come up too quickly to take down any of the other champions. Superchampions get twice as long to face their mandatories (the regular champs), so they can go after other beltholders instead. Whether you think unification of the belts is a valid exercise is another story, but I can see why they do it, other than collection of additional sanctioning fees.
That's just an excuse, if the sanctioning bodies actually cared about that they would simply extend the mandatory period for their champion in case he unified belts and that's it. There is absolutly no reason for another "champ" other than sanctioning fees.

[Steve Fox]

What if a superchampion fought a regular champion?

[sandwichsurgeon]

What if a superchampion fought a regular champion?

Super dooper champ duh:patsch

[achillesthegreat]

If The Ring want to be helpful and the people want to use their power this is the sort of shit that needs to be exposed and petitioned. An interim champ is ok, circumstances often calls for it but a super champ. That's just for extra sanctioning fees.

[pecks]

The regular champion that becomes available once the original title holder becomes super champion is pretty much just a glorified mandatory to the super champion.
Another good thing about it is that it forces the regular champion to fight guys ranked in the top 15 of their org.

It's still a load of balls though.

[*BOX_FAN*]

WBA in Cruiserweight is the best: Mormeck-WBA, Hill-WBA, Arslan-interim WBA :nut

[Stinky gloves]

WBA in Cruiserweight is the best: Mormeck-WBA, Hill-WBA, Arslan-interim WBA :nut

If Hill beat Cunningam and Maccarinelli collecting WBA/IBF/WBO -
will he be more undisputed than Mormeck who have WBA/WBC only?

[NBT]

What if a superchampion fought a regular champion?
What if? According to the WBA rules he has to. The "regular champion" is the mandatory challenger for the Super champion.
If Hill beat Cunningam and Maccarinelli collecting WBA/IBF/WBO -
Like I said, he isn't allowed to. If he would fight one of those guys he would be stripped.

[Stinky gloves]

What if? According to the WBA rules he has to. The "regular champion" is the mandatory challenger for the Super champion.

Really, so is Hill mandatory to Mormerck?

Hill won his title in january 2006 so its more than 17 months
since he is mandatory to Mormeck/Bell ... or maybe you talking bulshit?

[Brickhaus]

That's just an excuse, if the sanctioning bodies actually cared about that they would simply extend the mandatory period for their champion in case he unified belts and that's it. There is absolutly no reason for another "champ" other than sanctioning fees.

But then mandatories would never get a shot at a belt. It's a lose-lose situation. I personally think this is a better fix than just never making the champs fight their mandatories.

[NBT]

Really, so is Hill mandatory to Mormerck?

Hill won his title in january 2006 so its more than 17 months
since he is mandatory to Mormeck/Bell ... or maybe you talking bulshit?
Well, I said according to the rules... but that's the WBA for you, in theory Hill should have defended his title a long time ago as well as fought Bell a long time ago, but the WBA usually doesn't act according to their own rules.

btw read it here: [Only registered and activated users can see links]

"The SUPER CHAMPIONS will be obliged to make the mandatory defense of their titles in a period no longer than 18 months against the boxer recognized as the World Boxing Association Champion of the corresponding division. "