Unified Title vs Split non Unified

[TBooze]

Originally Posted by teeto

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.

I agree if you look back, you can find out THE World Champion for the era. But they are not Lineal Champions or Undisupted Champions.

As for The World Champion of the late 30s/early 40s; history suggests that Steele won The Championship; losing to Apostoli in 38; who lost to Garcia in 39; who lost to Overlin in 40; who lost to Soose in 41.

But while reigning, Apostoli lost a fight to Young CorbettIII, in a fight where CorbettIII was under 160lbs. Apostoli did win a rematch for the Championship nine months later.

[ThinBlack]

Sometimes, the "alphabet" holder often does more than many of the unified champs i.e Wilfredo Gomez, Larry Holmes, but it always good to have a unified holder, unfortunately in these wacky times, it's just not going to happen a lot.

[McGrain]

If you really, really like the fighter with the splintered title, you can rank him as if he was the undisputed master of the era. Otherwise, it's bad.

[lufcrazy]

In an ideal world the two best fighters in every division would fight each other next week and we'd have 17 ring champions that had prestige because they were ring champions so much so that everyone else wanted to beat the ring champion. The media would denounce the alphabet belts and noone would call themselves a champion unless they beat the ring champion. The ring would then sponsor stonehands awesome work as a "correct lineage". If number 2 don't wanna fight they get dropped in the rankings.

As it is and as it has been for a long time in boxing, there isn't that prestige nor drive. I don't look at titles, I just decide who I think is the best title holder per division, be it ring, lineal, alphabet or other (unless we have radical cases like gamboa). That to me means more than anything else.

Man beats the man is fine in an ideal world, but in the real world we've ended up with shit like briggs at hw, erdei at lhw, red at ww etc. Lineage only works as long as it's consensus and there's a drive for it. It's currently a mythical title and unless that changes my viewpoint won't change.

[Nightcrawler]

martinez hold no title but he's the champ. it's case by case really

[lufcrazy]

Originally Posted by Nightcrawler

martinez hold no title but he's the champ. it's case by case really

He has the ring title

[Vantage_West]

Originally Posted by teeto

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.

Originally Posted by teeto

Correction,

Lineal= Champ
Alphabet= titlist
Undisputed= usually champ, but not a given.

Originally Posted by teeto

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.

R.I.P. Teeto




also fucking 2008 yo