alex leapai. the southern hemespheres first heavyweight world champ.

Awesome to hear Alex is straight back and out into the international scene. Wish him the best for the Dec fight and for 2013.

 

More like "Should be more realism in the forum".

Leapai looks like a nice guy with some decent power an all but I can't see him going further than 3 rounds still.

Oh dear... this is just sad.atsch
I'd also like to know who was quoted aside from yourself as saying "Alex has the biggest punch in boxing since Tyson"?

 

Right back at ya...GBless and All the Best in China :bbb:good

 

Actually Lewis didn't have all the belts at that point. The WBA had stripped him by then for not facing John Ruiz... Which takes me back to my original comment that its hard to recognise the WBO's lineage. Nobody and I mean nobody thinks Damiani, Morrison or Bentt were the world Heavyweight champion. Nobody thought Wladimir was at that time either.

 

It is and IMO you can file him alongside Damiani and Bentt etc.

 

I agree 100 percent.

 

Whether we like it or not Corrie Sanders won a world title when he defeated Wlad, and that's what the OP was asking about. No mention was made by the OP of linear-only-champions.

 

Ok so where do we draw the line? Do we include IBO? WBF? IBC? IBA? WBB? Corrie Sanders IMO will go down as a solid contender but won't be recognised by most as a former Heavyweight champion. Gerrie Coetzee wasn't a linear champion, but he was a world champ. I don't recognise Sanders as that. Just my 2c. Just like I don't recognise Povetkin right now.

If the question was how many world champions has Great Britain had, I'd laugh if anyone included Herbie Hide, put it that way.

 

Nobody hates more than I do that there are so many orgs and each has so many belts within each weight division. The fact it comes down to individual opinion as to who are world champions and who aren't shows just how ****ed the sport is.

Funny you mention Herbie Hide. Your mate Totalpac was trying to talk up Damon Reed as world title challenger when he was a prospective de Mori opponent, by raising the Hide fight. The same one Reed didn't last a round in

 

He appears to be your mate more than mine, judging by your extensive conversations together.

It's fairly easy for knowledgable fans to work out who's the champion in each division, whether it be by lineage or another process. HBO and Showtime wouldnt even call the likes of Sanders as a world champion these days. They'd refer to him as a belt holder. They referred to Berto and Guerrero as "basically an eliminator" rather than an interim WBC title fight.

 

Totalpac speaks glowingly of you, and far less of me. Clearly your mate. Not mine

Nobody supports the 'we need less champions - preferably only one', argument more than I do.

But recognizing only one titleholder in each division is not as clear cut as you make it out to be.

Just one recent example >>>
Did you consider Manny Pacquiao's recent fights against Mosley, JMM and Bradley being for world titles? Most of the rest of the world did, and it was only a WBO title at stake.

 

I don't have a problem if they want to bill those bouts as a World title fight because you can make a strong case for Pacquiao being the best Welter in and around that time as for most of it Floyd was either inactive or at 154 with Cotto.

Did I see it as he was without a shadow of a doubt the best Welter on the planet? No. He'd have to fight Mayweather for that one. Obviously there are times you might not be able to work it out until two top fighters face each other. That's been the case throughout the history of boxing. Good to see the WBO have billed the next Pacquiao v Marquez belt as being for the "Champion of the Decade" belt. Guess they didn't want to miss out on a fee.

 

I agree with most of your thoughts regarding world titles :good

But unfortunately it's not the way most of the rest of the world sees things.

Whether you and I like it or not, many bouts are billed as, and believed by the vast majority to be for world titles. When in reality they are often not lineal, not for an in-demand title, nor even contested between anywhere near the best fighters at that weight.

The original question raised by Sally referred to 'world champion'. Not 'lineal' champion.

Did Corrie Sanders become a world titlist/champion when he KOed Wlad and won the WBO title? Ask 10 people and prepare to get 10 different answers

 

Just continuing >>>

Whom do you consider to be the current world heavyweight champion?

Wlad holds the WBA, IBF, WBO and IBO titles.

Vitali holds the WBC title.

Many, including I believe Ring magazine, have recognized Vitali as the lineal champion since he beat Corrie Sanders (there's that name again ).


So who is the current world heavyweight champion Ipswich Express??

 

Like I said, where do you draw a line in the sand? I certainly don't recognise the WBO Heavyweight title lineage. You can make a much stronger case for it at Middleweight. If most of the world recognise it, that's fine. Doesn't bother me in the slightest. If Corrie Sanders was calling himself world champion, I wouldn't be upset. I just don't recognise it.

Not even Corrie's immediate family would've considered him "the man" at Heavyweight while Lewis was there. I remember the fight well. the general reaction was a contender had been rolled by a fringe contender, not a passing of the torch. Incidentally he binned the title to fight Vitali.

As for asking 10 fans, I reckon you'd get 3 answers. Yes from the newer age fans who generally recognise the lot. Interim titles etc and probably don't follow the history of the sport as intently. A yeah he was a belt holder from those who kind of recognise the WBO and a no from the more die hard and older fans. Just my opinion.