Which current belt holder is the epitome of a paper titlist?

I think Figueroa would KO Bey.

 

Well only the first two apply to him being classified a paper champ but they are reason enough.

 

He would. Shafikov might too.

 

Lamont Peterson.

- lost the fight he "won" the title in
- cheated with PEDs
- stripped of the other title
- lost again to Matthysse at 141 by KO
- defended it against old Holt, unheralded Jean and Santana, next will be Cuenca

Undeserving piece of...paper champ.

 

Lamont Peterson is the most correct answer.

 

Typed mine in before I saw your post. Dead on the money :good

 

Anyone who gets a belt in a division but has not defend it against the top fighter(s) in that division.

 

Bey certainly qualifies, so does Peterson :yep

Another clear cut one is Quigg, although he's really a top 5 bw the way he got his paper interim belt and 'upgraded' it, while having a clear cut WBA champ in place is something to cry about.

- had to beat a 'soft' countryman for the vacant interim WBA kiddy belt.
- upgraded it to 'regular' by DRAWING a not too highly ranked but undefeated Cuban, who turned out to be a dud.
- constantly defends it against replacements.
- there already was a true WBA champion in place who can't be overlooked. Well, maybe in size.

 

Floyd Mayweather :

He only fights in Las Vegas

Picks his own referees and judges

Drained or bloated his opponents

Can you named a true champion who only fights in his hometown ?

 

This, completely. Obviously we can pick the worst of the bad apples, but they're all bad apples.

 

The real definition is someone that becomes a "champ" through chintzy or flukey circumstances (often through promotional sleight of hand or string pulling) and would ordinarily never be in a title match, let alone winning the big one.

So many (but not all) claimants of vacant, interim, or diluted or fractured (regular vs. Super etc) titles...as well as the majority of for instance Don King's charges that he maneuvered up the mountain's peak...though he obviously did have a few legit champions mixed in.

Now in the 4 belt era it has come to be used to refer to even guys that won a legit title fair and square, if they just happen to be the weakest of the belt holders at the weight.

 

In the case of the real definition, yeah it will probably have to be Mickey Bey in that case, maybe Jamie McDonnell who's matched up in a way where he's a 2 time belt holder (IBF, WBA). There's plenty of others.

 

Bey and McDonnell for sure - and Quigg.

Strictly speaking Soliman fits too - as does anyone that catches a) someone at the tail end of a hold-the-belt-hostage-at-home reign (often a paper champ themselves) or b) a once decent or even great champion who overstayed until they were beatable - due to age or injury - for even a no-mark lucky enough to get positioned into the right spot at the right time in the rankings.

So as much as I like Cotto and was thrilled at him achieving what he achieved on paper, I have to admit that at least at middleweight he is a paper champ unless he proves otherwise by racking up some legitimate defenses.

 

Is Quillin still a champ? Him, if so.

Great shout on Quigg.