Considering how exhilarating boxing is, how effortless it is to follow even with a basic understanding of what it takes to win a fight, and the incredible characters who shape the drama, it’s frustrating that the sport isn’t (universally) considered one of the greatest in the world.

Some will argue that this is the case, especially after the exceptional opening six months of 2024. But only those who promote their own companies within the boxing bubble, and thus enjoy something like a lucrative period, make such claims with any validity. Outside that bubble, where the general public is usually only teased once or twice a year, the view is somewhat different.

Despite colossal events like Tyson Fury-Oleksandr Usyk, boxing simply doesn’t change often enough. It’s a sport known for the occasional huge fight, but who, apart from you and me, pays attention to the thousands of other fights often enough for it to become a household staple?

The lack of interest can largely be explained by a long-standing, if understandable, reluctance to turn boxing into an organised enterprise. After all, it is not a team sport, nor has it ever been a slave to the clock, the calendar year or the fixture list, and so the tried and tested format of mainstream sports – one that ensures leagues, cups and tournaments are effortless to digest at set times and on set dates – simply does not exist here.

While it does warrant extra interest when spectacular fights suddenly happen – simply because they happen so rarely – the more familiar chaos often prevents the best fights from happening, and while the absurd number of belts on offer may indeed mean more ‘world title’ fights, it only serves to confuse casual sports fans. If you disagree, go tell one of the million or more who bought into the Fury-Usyk fuss that Daniel Dubois is now the heavyweight champion of the world and you’ll see their eyes glaze over as you try to explain why, just two months later, there’s no longer an undisputed king.

In recent months, thanks almost exclusively to the involvement of the Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority – headed by Turki Alalshikh – the number of elite-level fights has increased dramatically. As has the unification of titles. It’s a welcome trend. As for boxing, it’s demanding to deny that it’s in a good place, so it might seem a bit rude to criticize it here, especially considering Alalshikh’s plans at an advanced stage.

But is the sport really healing, or has a giant silk plaster simply been slapped on senior wounds? After all, it will take more than sporadic cash injections from the Middle East to make changes last, to ensure that any improvements are widespread and sustainable in the long term. What’s more, while we can dress the windows with eye-catching competitions, it’s equally essential to ensure that the rest of the shop is well-stocked and properly managed for the business to truly thrive.

Here are six issues boxing needs to address to become a leading sport.

1. ONE WORLD CHAMPION IN EACH DIVISION

There are four sanctioning bodies (WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO) recognized in the sport – five if you include the IBO. All have different rankings and none have a governing body, other than the Association of Boxing Commissions (ABC), to which they must answer.

So – bear with me – the champion of one organization cannot be ranked by other organizations, and as a result, there is no single rule, commission or sanctioning body that requires the best to compete against the best.

The rules of the WBC, arguably the most influential of all ranking organizations, state: “No champion from another boxing organization will be placed in the top ten because his boxing duties do not allow him to challenge for the WBC title. Accordingly, such opportunities will be granted to those fighters who express a desire to challenge for the WBC title.” No sport could thrive under such absurd circumstances.

While seasoned boxing fans have reluctantly accepted this system, studied the conflicting rankings, and lost their minds over the sheer insanity of it all, it is exceptionally arduous to explain to those interested in just a little bit why there can be five or more “world” champions in some weight classes.

There are often several world title fights in the same category in a tiny period of time, sometimes even on the same event, with different boxers taking part in all of them, and each belt holder is presented to the public – with a straight face – as world champion. Case in point, the three-week stretch in 2020 between Oct. 17 and Nov. 7 when Teofimo Lopez, Gervonta Davis, and Devin Haney all paraded versions of the lightweight world title. Imagine for a moment that you were fresh to the sport, were all excited to see Lopez beat Vasiliy Lomachenko, and bought into the story about him being the fresh 135-pound champion, only to be introduced to not one but two more who supposedly also ruled the lightweight world just days later.

While Dubois-Anthony Joshua is a huge heavyweight clash and was likely settled at the negotiating table by the IBF belt, are we really going to try to pass it off as a world title fight just five months after we all went wild over the undisputed champion being crowned for the first time in 25 years? Those in the promotion’s heartland might think the IBF title adds extra glamour to the fight. The truth is, Dubois-Joshua sells huge time – with or without the red leather belt.

The bottom line is that the current championship system is too convoluted to understand, and if the general public can’t understand it and invest their time and money into something instead, that something will have a demanding time growing. Simply put, boxing should have a championship system that is as effortless to understand as the fights themselves.

One world champion in each weight class would dispel this confusion and make our sport more attractive – not only to fans, but also to the wider media, which, apart from specialist media, only learns about boxing’s existence when a truly massive fight takes place.

So how did we get into this mess? The proliferation of titles is attractive to both promoters and broadcasters because they can dress up more fights as “world title fights.” Some argue that a single champion would limit the options for contenders, and there’s some truth to that. But do other sports suffer because only a select few win the top prize?

The fact that so many title fights go unnoticed outside the boxing bubble shows that all the extra belts dilute both interest and quality. And it’s not just the fault of promoters, broadcasters and sanctioning bodies – the belts are now so ingrained in the consciousness of the entire sport that changing the system will require a monumental effort from the entire industry.

Is there a solution? With four (or five) sanctioning bodies, perhaps just recognizing one of them would lend a hand. But for that to happen, the one that remains would have to address its current policies – regarding rankings, sanctioning fees, cozy relationships with certain influential brokers, and its attitude to performance enhancing drugs – to really stand out from the crowd. And while there are better organizations than others, it’s unrealistic to expect one to rise while the others fall.

There have been repeated rumors that a superpower—such as Saudi Arabia or even Dana White—could buy all the bodies to gain total control. But then what?

A more reasonable solution seems to be to create a better system – one that, over time, makes the senior system completely irrelevant. “That will never happen,” everyone groans. But why not? If you can spend half a billion on a single event – ​​which is what was reportedly the fee for putting on Fury-Francis Ngannou last year – surely there’s money to fix a broken system?

Creating a title that only the best fighters can compete with would go some way to quickly building a following. And being the absolute best fighter in the world would suit the ego and competitive spirit of top boxers very well – especially if there was a clear path to that status. The elimination fights would become huge events – think quarter-finals and semi-finals of major tournaments – and ruling that championships must be held three times a year would ensure regular, top-flight action.

Adding an additional cash prize for winning and defending a title – as opposed to the sanctioning fees boxers currently have to pay to fight for the alphabetical titles – would also make the process easier.