Originally Posted by Hands of Iron
I think it's as sound of a system that could be implemented in the sport, but the idea that Robinson should've never been Champion really doesn't sit well with me because even more importantly than the "No. 1 vs No. 2" fighting for a vacated title is that the Champion who dropped it was/is fighting the division's top contenders on a consistent basis. If not, then it's a fraudulent reign and the 'Lineal Champion' loses all value and worth, without question.
Granted, Cochrane served in the Navy for two years in 1942-43, just who the hell did he defend the title against upon winning it from Zivic in 1941 to losing it to Servo in 1945? He didn't defend against one single, solitary welterweight contender over the entirety of his "reign" in between winning and losing it? Sure, he lost to Zivic in a non-title rematch, and lost it to Servo who retired soon thereafter... Did I mention Robinson went 4-0 against these two over the same time period? In addition to beating Henry Armstrong, Jackie Wilson, Tommy Bell twice, George Costner, Izzy Jannazzo four times, Jimmy McDaniels, Norman Rubio, Tony Motisi, Joe Curcio, Sammy Angott... All - mostly highly - rated Welterweights... Hell, throw in LaMotta four times and Dellicurti who were Middleweights Robinson took coming in under the 147 limit. This is before The RING Magazine - Our Legit, Primary Rankings Body - even recognized him Champion.
What the hell is going on here? Time to make an exception, that.
Plus zivic had lost just before fighting Cochrane anyways.
When Robinson stopped zivic he put himself head and shoulders above any other we.
I don't care whether the number 1 is wbc, wba, lineal, who, ring, ibf or any other claim. I just care that he fights the best in the division and seeks to unify the claims.