Originally Posted by lufcrazy
Well he's not a champion based on a 1 v 2 rule but then again neither was Ray Robinson at WW, nor Larry Holmes at HW. He's recognised by all as number 1 and has unified WBA,WBO,IBF,Ring.
So 4 of the 5 accepted ranking bodies consider him a champion. He's certainly more worthy of the crown than Briggs ever was
Robinson became champion in 1946. Between 1920 and the mid-60s, the sport was relatively uniform. It did not descend into madness until the 60s with the rise of the WBA and the WBC. We need clarity now more than at any time since the 1910s. With that in mind, please tell me a better rule for filling a vacant throne besides 1 vs 2 rule.
PS/ "accepted ranking bodies"--?! Come on, man. Using the WBS racketeers as evidence is a sure way to diminish your position.