Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-31-2008, 10:35 AM   #1
Bummy Davis
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 9,562
vCash: 1000
Default Unified Title vs Split non Unified

In light of Niclay Valuev becoming a 2 time Champion it leads me back over the years mostly since Don King came into play. There have been solid Champions who had to defend against the best like Joe Louis, Marciano, Ali and others do you think split Champions (some of them I dont even remember) who never unified ( did not have the desire) should be held in the same esteem or do you think the real title Chamipons should be rated above. Right now we have 4 Champions Vlad,Peter,Chagaev,Valuev...does there defences really count...How much harder is it to defend if there was 1 champ fighting the best....thoughts on subject
Bummy Davis is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 08-31-2008, 10:55 AM   #2
ChrisPontius
March 8th, 1971
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holland
Posts: 9,666
vCash: 238
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

I view champions as top contenders; top4 if you will. It's clear Wlad is the best out there today, but officially not THE champion yet.

It's a bit unfair though, beating 1 man to become the champion is easier than having to go through 3 champions with all the politics, Don King, Wilfried Sauerland, etc, around.

For instance, i don't consider Mike Weaver as a champion, despite him having the WBA title along with a nice set of "title" defenses. He was, however, a top contender because Holmes was the champion.

But who is a champion and who is not can be a subjective matter, sometimes even coming down to definition. Patterson was considered champion because Ring magazine considered Moore vs Patterson to be for the heavyweight title. Vitali Klitschko was given the Ring championship in 2004 but not everyone recognizes him as linear champion. Wlad vs Sultan could've been considered for the linear championship for the same reason as Patterson-Moore was. Just a matter of definition.
ChrisPontius is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2008, 04:31 PM   #3
Bummy Davis
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 9,562
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

I agree with the fact that Vlad has done everything at this point to unify, he beat Byrd and Sultan and Peter already and is the Champion, more than any . A match with Valuev would be interesting. The thing I am talking about is Weaver,Dokes,Bowe,Moorer, Foreman,Ruiz,Seldon.Thomas,,Tubbs,Page,...were they Champs....who was a champ and who was not and if they were not...Did they have any defences
Bummy Davis is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2008, 04:47 PM   #4
SuzieQ49
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Boston
Posts: 13,494
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

Quote:
I view champions as top contenders; top4 if you will. It's clear Wlad is the best out there today, but officially not THE champion yet.

Id like to see wlad beat chagaev and valuev before he calls himself the best. Chagaev is undefeated HW champion who has beaten better opposition than wlad has over the past 3 years. he also doesnt have 3 embarrasing stoppage losses on his record like wlad does. as far as im concerned chagaev has just as much claim to being the best in the division. a lackadasical win over tony thompson doesnt change that.
SuzieQ49 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2008, 06:08 PM   #5
TommyV
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South-East/Greater London.
Posts: 16,249
vCash: 1987
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

There's no doubt it's easier to defend a alphabet strap than the previous single versions of the titles. When there was one title, everybody wanted it. Now fighters don't seem that interested in belts, just money.

Also with the 4 organizations fighters are split between them, I mean for example Valuev isn't going to have to defend against the best, being Wladimir Klitschko, because he's obviously also a champion and being the IBF and WBO champion of course isn't a mandatory, so Valuev is going to get away without fighting the best fighter in his division.
TommyV is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2008, 06:53 PM   #6
ChrisPontius
March 8th, 1971
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holland
Posts: 9,666
vCash: 238
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuzieQ49
Id like to see wlad beat chagaev and valuev before he calls himself the best.
Actually he doesn't call himself the best. He said he didn't feel champion until he unified all belts. I like that in a fighter. On Chagaev: i agree, he has a very good resume and in my opinion he's the #2 guy at the moment, followed closely by Valuev and Peter. I believe he'll beat Valuev again in the upcoming rematch, if he retains his ability after the injuries and layoffs.
ChrisPontius is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2008, 07:13 PM   #7
teeto
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Team Ireland Manor, Easing Pabuiao into the life of managing the GOAT
Posts: 14,048
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

Im not saying the title is the most important thing in terms of greatness or legacy, it isnt imo. But when solely on the topic of the championship, i normally consider the lineal title (and it is possible to trace them correctly), although i am completely knowledgeable of the alphabet titles, thats all i see them as. On saying that, i do give much credit to a titlist who sees his title as 'the championship' and defends it as if it is just that, doing so honourably and with dignity, kind of like what Felix Trinidad did with his IBF 147 pound title. It wasnt actually the lineal title, the WBC was at that time, its clear if you trace it back.
teeto is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2008, 07:29 PM   #8
dmille
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 996
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

Undisputed = Champion
Alphabet = Titleholder
dmille is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2008, 07:32 PM   #9
teeto
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Team Ireland Manor, Easing Pabuiao into the life of managing the GOAT
Posts: 14,048
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmille
Undisputed = Champion
Alphabet = Titleholder
Correction,

Lineal= Champ
Alphabet= titlist
Undisputed= usually champ, but not a given.
teeto is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 03:52 AM   #10
Loewe
internet hero
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: in exile
Posts: 2,740
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bummy Davis
In light of Niclay Valuev becoming a 2 time Champion it leads me back over the years mostly since Don King came into play. There have been solid Champions who had to defend against the best like Joe Louis, Marciano, Ali and others do you think split Champions (some of them I dont even remember) who never unified ( did not have the desire) should be held in the same esteem or do you think the real title Chamipons should be rated above. Right now we have 4 Champions Vlad,Peter,Chagaev,Valuev...does there defences really count...How much harder is it to defend if there was 1 champ fighting the best....thoughts on subject
Depends, if you have a dominant titlist who is recognized as the best at his weight like Wlad who isnīt able to unify due to politics than it is nearly as good as beeing the champ. If a titlist is only interested in keeping his belt and make money of it, like Felix Sturm, than heīs just a contender and not even the best.

The linear title is what counts. Thatīs why Pavlik is the champ and Abraham is the No. 1 contender but than it can be that you have a guy like Erdei who has the lhw linear title and an alphabet strap but doesnīt fight the best and there are obviously better fighters around at his weight. That is only possible due to the ABCs.
Loewe is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 04:03 AM   #11
TBooze
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: South of London
Posts: 10,901
vCash: 1031
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

Quote:
Originally Posted by teeto
Correction,

Lineal= Champ

There has not been a true Lineal champion since 2001 when Girard gave up his 168lbs crown.

It is naive to suggest that boxing has Lineal champs, Lineage has long since been broken in every division, if it was ever there in the first place.

Also you can never have an undisputed champion, because someone will always dispute it!

All you and I and everyone else have is a personal opinion as to who is champion.
TBooze is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 06:05 AM   #12
teeto
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Team Ireland Manor, Easing Pabuiao into the life of managing the GOAT
Posts: 14,048
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

Quote:
Originally Posted by TBooze
There has not been a true Lineal champion since 2001 when Girard gave up his 168lbs crown.

It is naive to suggest that boxing has Lineal champs, Lineage has long since been broken in every division, if it was ever there in the first place.

Also you can never have an undisputed champion, because someone will always dispute it!

All you and I and everyone else have is a personal opinion as to who is champion.
I just think that lineage can be restored in a 'perfect world' where rankings are totally correct and justifiable. Lineage in terms of the world title is not the same as say in a royal family. If a lineal champion retires and his title is therefore vacated, then the correct way of restoring lineage would be for the justifiably ranked number 1 and 2 in the division to contest the beginning of a new lineage. Like i say, this would be a 'perfect world'. Also, when i say rankings, i dont mean Ring magazine rankings, if you look over boxing's history, it is possible to really see who the true champion was. I maybe wrong, i can't remember now, but when reading Charley Burley's book, i learned that (and my memory may serve me wrong) that Ken Overlin was the true champion at one point, or it may have been Soose, who beat Overlin, and lineage in my opinion followed from there, the title was being disputed at that time.
I would like to say though, that the parts of your post that i have highlighted, i strongly agree with.
teeto is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 06:18 AM   #13
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,545
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuzieQ49
Id like to see wlad beat chagaev and valuev before he calls himself the best. Chagaev is undefeated HW champion who has beaten better opposition than wlad has over the past 3 years. he also doesnt have 3 embarrasing stoppage losses on his record like wlad does. as far as im concerned chagaev has just as much claim to being the best in the division. a lackadasical win over tony thompson doesnt change that.

This is how I feel - I think Wlad is the best, but should he automatically be elivated above Chagaev based upon the way he looks? Not neccesarily. I look to the guy with the Ring belt, generally, but I think the HW division is one where the top guys absolutley need to square off to settle this. Ironically, it's the one where this is least likely to happen.

Chagaev infuriates me. I think he looks like a cracking fighter - but he's always injured.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 08:34 AM   #14
Bummy Davis
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 9,562
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loewe
Depends, if you have a dominant titlist who is recognized as the best at his weight like Wlad who isnīt able to unify due to politics than it is nearly as good as beeing the champ. If a titlist is only interested in keeping his belt and make money of it, like Felix Sturm, than heīs just a contender and not even the best.

The linear title is what counts. Thatīs why Pavlik is the champ and Abraham is the No. 1 contender but than it can be that you have a guy like Erdei who has the lhw linear title and an alphabet strap but doesnīt fight the best and there are obviously better fighters around at his weight. That is only possible due to the ABCs.

I agree, its the fighter that at least trys to unify who should be reconized, with these split or bogus titles it all lies with the fighter who wants to unify because he wants to clear up confustion and knows and feels he is the best....I dont think Larry Holmes tried enough to do this and was content in the safety of the split titles...Riddick Bowe threw a title away rather than fight Lennox after that I reconized Lewis and anything he did before that. We are talking Heavys but there are many other instances in lower divisions...Who was at fault Jones Or Darius M. for robbing the fans of the unification at least Lacy and Calzage took the chance and gave the fans what they wanted
Bummy Davis is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2008, 08:46 PM   #15
Bill1234
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,005
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Unified Title vs Split non Unified

A lot of times the split titles have to do the politics (money). What will make more money, 1 unified champion, medium draw, and earns about 4-5 million per fight or 4 champions, 3 small draws, 1 medium draw, earn ingabout 2-4 million per fight? In the cases like Tyson and Holyfield the promoter would make it easy for him unify because he was a very big draw and could earn him the same, or more money than 4 champions.

That's how I take it at least.
Bill1234 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013