For how long do you consider Wlad to have been the true HW champ?

What a tit this tit is

 

Keep seeing Vitali being referred to as the Champ prior to his retirement.

If you have to beat the recognised No. 2 to become Champ, when did this occur for Vitali? Seems like a double standard here, because I don't see any time that could have occurred in Vitali's CV?

It definitely occurred for Wlad with Chagaev, but I think you have to apply some common sense to it. For me, he was definitely the man at the weight after he beat Byrd.

 

It's a good point above regarding how the new lineage is established. I think it's too simplistic to say it has to be #1 and #2 as well.

No clearer example exists than at LHW - where Stevenson is considered lineal despite Kovalev holding 3 of the 4 titles at the weight and being in the P4P top 5.

 

From 2006 when he took it from Byrd. Byrd was more well regarded than any of the other titlists. By the same token, I count all of Holmes title defenses as well, not just post Ali, even though he never unified. Its fair that Wlad's goes with an asterisk because of Vitali, though.

 

Since the Chagaev fight for me...

 

When Wlad beat Chagaev for me, I think, yep...It's a pity the heavyweight around with the best chance to really have tested him was his brother...

 

Vitali was officially retired for 4 years, that's a long time for a Championship claim to remain valid. It would be unprecedented in fact.

Previous retirement comebacks argued to be lineal:

Ali: officially retired less than a year (July, 1979)
Louis: officially retired just over a year (March, 1949)

Previous retirement comebacks not considered lineal:

Jeffries: retired 5 years

Longest break for Champion still considered lineal

Willard: 3 years but fought 16+ exhibitions with no official retirement.

Dempsey: 3 years but fought countless exhibitions with no official retirement

 

This has been some good points brought up by everyone but it doesn't change reality at all. Wlad has OWNED the heavyweight division for the majority of this new millenia (2000s and up; since we're 15 years in and he's been a champ for about a decade)

 

Good question. For me its "who is the best hw champ right now" not "who has the best overall career among hw belt holders".

 

He had retired.

So theoretically, he's out of the picture.

But wait...

He comes back !

So does he bring back his linear status with him ?

And if he does, is there a 'statute of limitations' on this thing called linearity ?

How long does the linearity last into retirement, and how shot must the retiring linear champ be, before he can't come back and claim he's still linear ?

Hence, my question earlier in the thread:

The subjectivity is rampant.

 

Instead of rematching Byrd, a guy he had *already* beaten, Wlad should have rematched Sanders or Brewster [before his loss to Liakhovich]. He didn't - which is why Wlad was and is a complete J O K E.