As you have probably heard, Floyd Mayweather Jr. will be going to jail next year to serve time for pleading guilty to several charges.
It seemed, at first, that Mayweather would be stripped of his title while in prison.
Now, it appears certain.
According to World Boxing Council regulations, when a champion or highly ranked fighter serves time in jail, the WBC is supposed to strip them of their title—if they have one—and remove them from the rankings.
Recently, Don Jose Sulaiman, president of the WBC, announced that he believes the WBC shouldn't strip Floyd of his title just because he's going to jail. He also said that he doesn't want Floyd to be touched at all because of the possibility a Mayweather/Pacquiao fight coming to fruition.
If I'm not mistaken, the Sulaiman wants to bend their own regulations for Mayweather just because of a possible opportunity of him fighting Manny Pacquiao. This would mean that the title would be involved and they have a chance at making serious money in what would be dubbed the most lucrative fight in the history of boxing.
Of course, that's just my opinion on the matter.
Now, after hearing about this incident, it got me to thinking of some of the other escapades the WBC have gotten into in recent memory.
Before the Sergio Martinez was the WBC diamond champion, he was actually the regular WBC champion. Later the WBC elevated him to emeritus champion and promoted Zbik to full champion.
Do you think the WBC should strip Mayweather?
The reason for this was because the WBC ordered Martinez to fight Zbik or get stripped, but HBO wouldn't televise the fight between the two.
So, Zbik was made full champion and eventually took on Julio Caesar Chavez Jr. Surprisingly HBO bought the fight between the two, even though they woulnd't for Martinez—who coincidentally was fighting on HBO against Junior Middle weight champion Dzinzurik.
Funny how that works out.
Next up is the stripping of Timothy Bradley's belt.
The WBC doesn't really consider Bradley being stripped though; it's more like a champion in recess. This was brought on because of Bradley's legal problems that he had with his promoter because he was trying to leave.
As a result, he wasn't able to make a fight and spent most of his time on the sidelines.
So, Bradley's title was made vacant. Erik Morales was then able to come in and fight for the WBC title on the Mayweather/Ortiz undercard earlier this year.
To be fair, the WBC has a set of rules which dictates that a champion must defend their title at least three times a year and can't stay nactive for more than six months.
Which major sanctioning body do you think is the worst?
This brings on another recent case in Nonito Donaire.
Donaire also had promoter trouble when he tried to leave Top Rank after his career defining win over Montiel and was inactive for almost as long as Bradley was. However, he was able to keep his title and fight Narvaez in October, while Bradley signed on with Top Rank and fought Casamayor in November.
This is another case were the WBC was apparently able to create some wiggle room.
Here's a case in which the WBC "stood by their boxer" despite them being in trouble.
Earlier this year, Alvarez was accused of beating up fellow boxer Ulises Solis on the streets for talking with his girlfriend.
The WBC, like they did for Mayweather, took a stance behind Canelo at the beginning, despite Canelo constantly changing his story and trying to blame the fight on his brother.
If the WBC continue to stand behind Mayweather and allowing him to keep his title because they want their hand in the potential mega bout is wrong.
They may be on the bitter end of this when all is said and done because Mayweather knows he doesn't need a belt to let people know he's a force to be reckoned with.
The WBC is inconsistent in almost everything they say, and they rightfully deserve all the criticism they receive for being the worst sanctioning body alongside the WBA.