Klitschko vs Irbagimov for the lineal title?

[Mendoza]

It is not a clear-cut issue. Ibragimov is an accomplished guy. He won a medal at the Olympics, hold two wins over past lineal champions, is un-defeated, and in his prime.

I would argue Ibragimov's credentials for this fight are decent even if there are two other champions. Maskeav has been too in-active, and his last opponent was an easy mark. Chagaev was ill, and Skelton in my opinion is not better than Briggs or Holyfield.

Kltischko vs Ibragimov is a rare title unification match that puts two champions in their primes vs each other. Since Wlad is already #1, and Ibragimov is worthy, boxing has a decision to make. Do they want to continue the lineal championship or not? It’s now, or maybe never.

Will it be a clean succession? No, but neither were the other ones.

[OLD FOGEY]

Wlad Klitschko is the number one man right now, but Chagaev has the best claim to #2. Ibragimov's win over an ancient Holyfield doesn't cut much ice with me as proving him the top contender.

I don't know if a man can be anointed by consensus as lineal champion. It seems to me you have to meet the criteria--beat the man who is the man or beat all the other top contenders. Ibragimov is not even the next best contender right now.

[ChrisPontius]

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY

I think Chagaev has a right to be in this. In fact, Patterson had a fairly weak claim on the linear championship as he did not eliminate the top challengers. Liston did. The best Patterson did was beat a man who had already been beaten badly by the old champion.

Yes. And he was (and is) still recognised as the lineal champion, the man to beat. Based on that i wouldn't consider it to be unreasonable to recognise the winner of Wlad/Sultan as linear champ.

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY

As Sharkey defeated Schmeling, Carnera, Loughran, Stribling, and Uzcudun, what exactly did he fail to prove? I understand the Schmeling decision was questionable, but Sharkey did get the nod.

You can say the same about Wlad in the current division.

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY

It appears to me that in the 21st century the concept of a linear championship is going to be severely devalued.

Depends. But as i've argued above, the winner of Wlad/Sultan as linear champ is not much different from Patterson/Moore, which was the standard 50 years ago at boxing's peak.

[OLD FOGEY]

Originally Posted by ChrisPontius

Yes. And he was (and is) still recognised as the lineal champion, the man to beat. Based on that i wouldn't consider it to be unreasonable to recognise the winner of Wlad/Sultan as linear champ.




You can say the same about Wlad in the current division.




Depends. But as i've argued above, the winner of Wlad/Sultan as linear champ is not much different from Patterson/Moore, which was the standard 50 years ago at boxing's peak.

As I posted and it may just be my idiosyncratic position, but was Patterson really the lineal champion just because he was universally recognized because of the centralization of decision making authority in the IBC back then. He beat Jackson and Moore, but Machen also crushed Jackson, as well as Valdes and Baker. Moore was not champion. He was a contender who had been badly beaten by Marciano. I think Patterson had to defeat the top contenders such as Machen and Folley to really earn his place as the lineal champion and he did not do it.

I started a thread on "lineal champions" and would be interested in what is your definition. Maybe I don't quite understand the term.

[Mendoza]

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY

Wlad Klitschko is the number one man right now, but Chagaev has the best claim to #2. Ibragimov's win over an ancient Holyfield doesn't cut much ice with me as proving him the top contender.

I don't know if a man can be anointed by consensus as lineal champion. It seems to me you have to meet the criteria--beat the man who is the man or beat all the other top contenders. Ibragimov is not even the next best contender right now.

OLD FOGEY,


How can we say for sure if Chagaev is better than Ibragimov? Both are undefeated. I think they would need to meet in the ring to decide that. Chageav had a chance to fight Ibragimov in a title unification match but pulled out and did not reschedule.


Ibragimov has fought better competition as of late. Chagaev has been fighting 2nd raters.


IMO, Ibragimov is playing the part and risking his title vs the #1 guy. He is acting like he want to be #1. Chagaev is taking it easy with his title, and plans to face the wahsed up Krasniqui next after beating a mildly skilled Skelton.

I still say if boxing wants to rekindle its linear flame, this fight is about as good as its going to get. Boxing must choose.

[OLD FOGEY]

Originally Posted by Mendoza

OLD FOGEY,


How can we say for sure if Chagaev is better than Ibragimov? Both are undefeated. I think they would need to meet in the ring to decide that. Chageav had a chance to fight Ibragimov in a title unification match but pulled out and did not reschedule.


Ibragimov has fought better competition as of late. Chagaev has been fighting 2nd raters.


IMO, Ibragimov is playing the part and riskign his title vs the #1 guy. Chagaev is taking it easy with his title, and plans to face the wahsed up Krasniqui next after beating a mildly skilled Skelton.

I still say if boxing wants to rekindle its linear flame, this fight is about as good as its going to get. Boxing must choose.

But Chagaev defeated Valuev, whom I would consider far above Briggs or Holyfield at this point.

Mendoza--I started a separate thread on lineal champions. I would be very interested in what the actual definition is for most people. I would really like your thoughts.

[Mendoza]

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY

Mendoza--I started a separate thread on lineal champions. I would be very interested in what the actual definition is for most people. I would really like your thoughts.

Done. Let me know what you think. IMO, it is not my interpretation of linear / lienar it is how history saw it in previous cases.

[janitor]

My main problem is that Ibragimov is not really a top 4 contender although he is a beltholder. If Wlad fought Chagev Maskaev or Peter the case would be stronger.

When Klitschko senior fought Sanders you had two titleholders (Sanders never lost his belt in the ring), both ranked in the top 3 going at it. The case was prety strong in my opinion. Perhaps better than that of the Hart Root winner.

[OLD FOGEY]

Originally Posted by janitor

My main problem is that Ibragimov is not really a top 4 contender although he is a beltholder. If Wlad fought Chagev Maskaev or Peter the case would be stronger.

When Klitschko senior fought Sanders you had two titleholders (Sanders never lost his belt in the ring), both ranked in the top 3 going at it. The case was prety strong in my opinion. Perhaps better than that of the Hart Root winner.

Janitor--I started a thread just to get definitions of what the criteria for a lineal champion is. I would really appreciate your opinion.

[jc]

In my mind im thinkning it is for the heavyweight title. Wlad is not linear though, he is the best guy out there, which at this moment in time is the best we can hope for.

i agree that VK vs Sanders had a more legit claim at beaing for the linear title.

[mattdonnellon]

Linear means a straight line, it dies if a champion retires. What you then get(if your lucky!) is a new line and a new champion. Vitali should have been accorded this but now things have moved on and this fight should anoint a new champion, the others ie Maskaev, Chagaev, Valuev, Peters, Vitali, Peters, Povetkin can become the champion by beating the winner, simple?
BTW Patterson, in fairness beat the generally recognised contenders in Jackson and Moore and it is revisionalism to say that his LATER reluctance to fight Machen and Folley made himout to be not the champion in 1956, that came nearly two/three years later.

[Mendoza]

Originally Posted by janitor

My main problem is that Ibragimov is not really a top 4 contender although he is a beltholder. If Wlad fought Chagev Maskaev or Peter the case would be stronger.

We don't know if Ibragimov is a top four right now. Wlad already fought and beat Peter. He also defeated Byrd who was a #1 Ring Magazine guy when they fought, and two other undefeated fighters since. If he beats Ibragimov who is an undefeated champion, I think this is enough.

[OLD FOGEY]

Originally Posted by mattdonnellon

Linear means a straight line, it dies if a champion retires. What you then get(if your lucky!) is a new line and a new champion. Vitali should have been accorded this but now things have moved on and this fight should anoint a new champion, the others ie Maskaev, Chagaev, Valuev, Peters, Vitali, Peters, Povetkin can become the champion by beating the winner, simple?
BTW Patterson, in fairness beat the generally recognised contenders in Jackson and Moore and it is revisionalism to say that his LATER reluctance to fight Machen and Folley made himout to be not the champion in 1956, that came nearly two/three years later.

As I remember it, no one put it that he was not the champion. Many commentaters did say he was a cheese champion, though. By the end of 1957, Machen had a perfect record and had ko'd Jackson as decisively as Patterson, had also ko'd Valdes who had stopped Jackson, had beaten Baker, and had also beaten Maxim twice, who held a decision over Patterson. Many, and perhaps a majority, judged Machen better than Patterson.
Now this would not matter if Patterson won the title by beating the reigning lineal champion, but as is it did retroactively devalue his claim when he did not defend against Machen.

[Sardu]

All minutia about different titles aside - yes.

Klitschko is by far the best HW in the world and if he beats Ibraginov it just stakes his claim even more to being the one real HW champion.

[janitor]

Originally Posted by Mendoza

We don't know if Ibragimov is a top four right now. Wlad already fought and beat Peter. He also defeated Byrd who was a #1 Ring Magazine guy when they fought, and two other undefeated fighters since. If he beats Ibragimov who is an undefeated champion, I think this is enough.

Enough for what?

Enough to convice me that he is the best out there by a margin?

Already convinced.

Enough to give him lineage?

That is down to the technicalities.