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. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,178
    Sep 15, 2009
    :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
     
  2. Nay_Sayer

    Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

    15,707
    503
    May 25, 2009
    I can use that same argument against you.

    Alexander got the decision against Kotelnyk. You're the one who thinks he got "exposed".

    The FACT of the matter is, when Tim beat Devon, he beat the #2 140lb'er in the world.

    You don't have a leg to stand on in rating Khan above Bradley.
     
  3. Nay_Sayer

    Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

    15,707
    503
    May 25, 2009
    I see you're still hitting the sauce...
     
  4. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    I told you...call me Bronco...say sorry Bronco.


    This content is protected
     
  5. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,178
    Sep 15, 2009
    No that is my argument so you're backing me up there!

    I think devon lost to andrei and I think khan beat maidana so i'm using my interpretation when compiling my rankings.

    The fact according to who? Who says devon was the #2?
     
  6. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,776
    317
    Dec 12, 2005
    Holmes is complicated, precisely because of the WBA and WBC's nonsense. I wave them off and choose Holmes ultimately because of Ali.

    Tyson's unification was a big deal to the boxing world -because it was marketed as a big deal to the boxing world. I like the fact that he defeated all of the belt-holders and showed the world who the real champion is. However, had he ignored those belts, it would have been at once revolutionary and clarifying in the long-term sense. The sanctioning bodies breed confusion because of the belts and their competing agendas. They thrive in confusion. They are the problem and the media is directly complicit.

    PS/
    I didn't mind belt-holder either last summer. But I've since realized that it will become status-quo and nothing will change. Turning our backs on them and towards a rational system will change things.
     
  7. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,178
    Sep 15, 2009
    I'm almost 100% sure that shavers v holmes 2 was the 1 v 2 in the division.
     
  8. Nay_Sayer

    Nay_Sayer On Rick James Status banned Full Member

    15,707
    503
    May 25, 2009
    YOU do.
    Any further questions?
     
  9. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,178
    Sep 15, 2009
    I'm glad you put so much stock on what I say. Thank you. Since we're using my rankings you should now be more accepting of amir's place at the top. To break it down, he moved into second when kotelnick beat devon then moved into first when he beat judah.

    As for your question, I have one:

    Who's your number 1 for each division? I can't see it being too different.
     
  10. Grinder

    Grinder Dude, don't call me Dude Full Member

    5,895
    2,606
    Mar 24, 2005
    So how long do you wait after someone retires to find the next lineal champ?

    While Vitali was retired Wlad was the recognized HW champ. If they fought I think Wlad would lose. What is the answer?

    There is none, it is a philosophical question. Either Vitali lost it when he retired or he had it when he returned.
     
  11. PetethePrince

    PetethePrince Slick & Redheaded Full Member

    28,760
    84
    May 30, 2009
    Will there ever be a problem of never having to prove yourself to be the best without belts? On a rational stance one could rank Willis over Dempsey. But what historian would ever rank Willis ahead of Dempsey? Has the culture affected us? How do we break from that mold then? Would it just be as simple as a ranking system with the #1 guy being the champ, and everyone else just a ranked fighter? Since there are multiple fighters with multiple belts they care about, who gets the ultimately say for being the best fighter if for some reason they don't fight?
     
  12. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,178
    Sep 15, 2009
    Pete, this is exactly why I openly embrace the subjective nature of the sport.

    I don't believe in an appeal to the majority when it comes to ranking fighters. In a sport where people can view the individual fights completely differently it should be expected we view individual fighters completely differently.
     
  13. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,372
    473
    Oct 6, 2004
    If they dont fight, the fighter who was the champion first would be the best fighter. If this was neither fighter (due to retirements) there would be no champion.
     
  14. PetethePrince

    PetethePrince Slick & Redheaded Full Member

    28,760
    84
    May 30, 2009
    That's a solid rule. You'll run into a few critics who may say that we should judge fighters based on what they've actually done and not what we think they're capable of. Mayweather may have not fought the most dangerous and best opponents out there post JWW but that doesn't award him fantasy victories in my mind. At the same time, I have no problem with people thinking Mayweather is the P4P best even if his track record as of late is not stellar or truly deserving of such merit. But the skills are there, and even in light of Pac's latest performances which seems sub-par (Whether that be because of himself or his opponent, not the issue anyway), we as boxing fans shouldn't care if it seems fickle to change our P4P ranking after just one fight. We're not talking P4P but since we're in the same division we can talk about best WW. Some may say that the two best need to duke it out to prove who the best WW is. I'm sure that's Stonehands position. It's hard to argue, but say the fight never happens... that doesn't mean we can't form an opinion on who we think is the best, right? It's all subjective after all.
     
  15. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,178
    Sep 15, 2009
    Spot on. Even when it comes to who's a lineal champ and who isn't people disagree: belt unification; period of dominance; successive victories over top opposition; 1 v 2; following the ring belts; can lineal be retired etc.

    I prefer a more fluid look at things and I ask simply "who do I think is the best today"

    Floyd has a sort of interim promotion above pac in my eyes which he should justify in his next fight (or perhaps did justify in his last fight).

    Similar incident this morning at lww; bradley scored a clear victory over peterson but peterson has just defeated khan. Who do I rate higher? Stone will answer by demanding the two fight to settle score. I will simply form an opinion based on peterson's run of victories against ortiz, cayo and khan which is enough to justify top spot imo.