And that's ALL you need to know. Wlad is champion of PAPER until he beats the #2 HW in the world to establish a new lineage...
Chagaev was clearly #2 behind the Klitschkoes when Wlad beat him. So it was fair to crown him the lineal champ at that point, though I guess that won't satisfy the haters. Also, arguably Wlad beat the #1 heavyweight besides him when he beat Byrd in 06 and Ibragimov in 07. By beating Ibragimov, Wlad had defeated the best heavy out there, except for maybe Sam Peter or Ruslan Chagaev...guys that Wlad had beaten or would beat. If you look at the WBC lineage it's clear there was no legit WBC champ after Vitali.... Maskaev was not a legit champ--he was inactive for 16 months during his so-called reign. Eventually Sam Peter got the belt....but Wlad had already beaten him. http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/WBC_Heavyweight_Champion Chagaev was a more legit #2 having defeated Ruiz, Virchis, and Valuev (all via SD or MD)....and Wlad beat him comprehensively. The only reason this didn't make Wlad the lineal champ in everyone's eyes is because Vitali's victory over Peter made him higher ranked than Chagaev at the time. Basically Wlad has done everything he could have done short of fighting Vitali to prove himself as the lineal champ. In Wlad's era, no one besides Vitali and Lennox are in Wlad's league.
right.... Chagaev, Peter, and Ibragimov were on about the same level in 07 when Klitschko beat Ibragimov. While it isn't clear who was #2 before Vitali returned, it is clear that Wlad was a class above all of them.
Wlad has been the man of the division since 2006, just as Holmes was since 1978. If you want to talk about something meaningless and old fashioned like lineage, then you have to recognize 2008 or 2009 as the years that crowned Wlad as the new lineal champ (against Sultan or Ruslan). Just like Holmes officially gained lineage in 1980 against Ali's corpse, or Charles in 1950 against old Joe Louis. Fact is that Wlad, Holmes and Charles had been the top dogs of their divisions since much before.
It's just frustrating that Wladimir is not considered the champion in some people's eyes because of a technicality. If the Ring had made only slight changes to their rankings in 2005-2008 Wlad would have fought the #2 guy. Looking back at rankings, was Peter better than Ibragimov in 2007? Hard to say. It's absolutely ludicrous though to consider him a paper champ as Nay_Sayer does.
This has been my problem with the Klitschkos for quite a while now. Boxing is not a team sport. Perhaps it's just me but I'd like to see one undisputed champion who is considered the "heavyweight king". The Ks have always denied fans that. Neither have ever fought the other best fighter of their era (i.e. each other) and neither have been undisputed champions (either holding all the big belts or being widely considered the best). To me, those are two important factors in being considered truly great. (slighty off topic but I had to get it out.)
Ironically, the same people consider 45yo old Foreman and Briggs "lineal" champs. The lineage has absolutely no credibility anymore and I am not convinced if it ever had.
Having Vitali around has seriously damaged Wlad's legacy. Without Vitali, Wlad has fought nearly all the top guys including at least 2 #2's + Povetkin next. With Vitali around Wlad hasn't fought the most dangerous opponent of the majority of his career. I don't blame him at all but Vitali being around makes a huge difference.
There's only one thing for it; Wladimir should step up - drop the bs, stop being a girl, and officially challenge his big brother to a fight.
I expected to see this thread was a bump from 2008, but found it was only from 2009. So relevant nonetheless...
The Transnational Boxing Rankings? The one McG is involved with? They don't have Wladimir as lineal? :think
Nobody in their right mind thought Chagaev was the #2 heavyweight in the world. Its still vacant until #1 beats #2.