Has wlad done enough such that he's began a new universally accepted lineage?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by lufcrazy, Dec 2, 2011.


  1. Nay_Sayer

    Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

    15,707
    503
    May 25, 2009
    We, as fans of the sport of Boxing, should ignore the sanctioning mobs and their worthless trinkets. The linear and true title in each division is the only title worth recognizing.
     
  2. Nay_Sayer

    Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

    15,707
    503
    May 25, 2009
    Now you are starting to get the idea.


    It was good that those guys all got together and establised a new lineage @ 160 but I think it was clear from the beginning who was the best of those three.


    Exactly.
     
  3. Nay_Sayer

    Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

    15,707
    503
    May 25, 2009
    Which guy was that?
     
  4. Nay_Sayer

    Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

    15,707
    503
    May 25, 2009
    Holmes beat Ali so any questions about the legitimacy of his title stops right there...
     
  5. Nay_Sayer

    Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

    15,707
    503
    May 25, 2009
    I think that about sums it up.
     
  6. Nay_Sayer

    Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

    15,707
    503
    May 25, 2009
    Shouldn't Floyd be recognized as the linear champ @ 147?
     
  7. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,178
    Sep 15, 2009
    I think yes.

    He definitely retired after hatton so his claim went.

    But cotto v marg was surely the top two ww's and floyd traces his claim back to that fight.
     
  8. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,776
    317
    Dec 12, 2005
    If The Ring was consistent, they would recognize him as the linear champ. They recognized -or rerecognized- Jack Johnson and Joe Louis, for example, as the linear champ when they came out of retirement and only recognized the successor after he beat them.

    I think that is just wrong, wrong. A champion retires, he vacates the throne. He comes back, he has no claim to the throne until he wins it by combat.

    Floyd retired on 6/6/2008.

    The Ring should either recognize him or fix their lineages, or talk to me and I'll freakin fix it for them.
     
  9. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,776
    317
    Dec 12, 2005
    Here's why I like the Ring Rankings even though they have oversights at times... it isn't just one man deciding who are the top two WWs. It's a panel. As much as you know your stuff, you're just one man. See what I'm saying?
     
  10. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,178
    Sep 15, 2009
    I have no problem with lineage. My problem is people making out it's the be all and end all for example briggs > wlad.

    I'm happy with there being a difference between the lineal champ and the best in the division but hopefully these will overlap more often than not.

    How do you the cotto v marg fight? I think that might have been a 1 v 3 fight but I don't think that's always a bad thing.

    Marg v mosley was also 1 v 3.
     
  11. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,178
    Sep 15, 2009
    Sorry, you misunderstood my post.

    I was asking in terms of the ring; I thought they were 1 v 2 by the ring. I don't have the rankings to hand.
     
  12. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,776
    317
    Dec 12, 2005
    Your apology is not accepted because it's mine to give! ...Sorry.
     
  13. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,178
    Sep 15, 2009
    Not at all, given my work on the premiere fighter it's obvious I view opinion over that of the ring.

    However i'm happy that the two concepts are different enough that I can still discuss lineage without any overlap.

    If there is a push for a greater acceptance of linearity the only worthwhile rankings at present are the ring's.

    I think I have a new issue however with your system.

    Marg v cotto was 1 v 3 and marg brutally stopped cotto. A rematch wouldn't have proven much at all but it would have satisfied your criteria.

    If the two are 1 v 2 after a fight a rematch satisfies your criteria without being necessary, if you get my meaning?
     
  14. antonio8904

    antonio8904 Atheist Full Member

    6,138
    1
    Oct 19, 2008
    this...^
     
  15. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,776
    317
    Dec 12, 2005
    Same thing happened with Forrest and Mosley in 2002 -they weren't 1 and 2 during the first bout but were for the second, and so only then did Forrest take the throne vacated by Trinidad's throne.

    Absent any other official determinant, it's gotta be 1 vs. 2. Making exceptions may put the most deserving guy on the throne, but it will make the rules no more valid than the WBCs.

    And again, if 1 or 2 won't fight their main rival, then the rankings can reflect that the following month. Stugots should count when ranking fighters!

    Also, in the scenerio that you put forth, if a guy gets wrecked in the first bout, it will be pretty rare that he will only move no slots or one slot. If he loses again to anyone, then he will surely move down.

    No system is going to be completely clean. I just see this one as the best one because it controls for all of the holes and bad logic of CBZ and The Ring and others that I've seen.