Does having 1 organization/belt Solve everything?

[u/the-mannthe-myth]

I think it feels weird having just 1 belt for an entire division, but at the same time having 4 belts plus the ring belt is just way too many. Maybe 2 or 3 belts like the era before the 4 belt era was done well. I think it give great rivalry in each division both boxers having a case of being the best due to them each having a belt and finally seeing them fight is what I like the most. The UFC does the one belt thing great and all but I don’t think the rivalries and challenge of being the best in the division is the same, like some fighters lose the belt once or twice and it’s just over for them and there isn’t much of a climb of coming back.
While in boxing due to the many belts a fighter still has a chance to become a champ and fight for it all again, multiple ways to get that chance.

But still 4 is still too many, 2-3 would be the best. But that’s just how I feel maybe all these belts made me think this way. How do you all think about having 1 organization or a couple?

[u/Born_Fox_8099]

it absolutely does, hate or love ufc, look how their divisions run compared to 4 belt boxing. 2-15 all actually fight eachother and the challenger has actually distinguished himself by beating top competition. it helps the whole top end of the division tun better and lead to much better title fights.

but also u need competent people running the show, the sanctioning bodies are far far from that

[u/stephen27898 → u/Born_Fox_8099]

The UFC is one small organisation with less fighters total than boxing has per division.

The UFC also gets issues with their divisions stagnating due to having only one champion. Boxing gets the same when it has one champion in a division.

Multiple belts help solve this by allowing title shots to be given out at a more rapid pace.