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

:deal

 

I did.

Like I said, only on Planet Klitschko.

 

NO.

Wlad has been a titlist for about a decade. He won the vacant lineal title when he beat Povetkin...

 

I think the Byrd fight is a little too soon to crown Wlad, the Haye fight too late, and the Povetkin fight way too late.

I think its either the Chagaev or Sultan matches that established Wlad. Chagaev is a #1 vs #3, which is good as we were going to get with Vitali being #2. I also think its the more widely agreed upon point where Wlad re-established the linear title. I see nothing wrong with starting with the Chagaev win.

I also think a good case can be made for when Wlad beat Sultan. The preferred way of crowning a champ after a retirement would be a 1 vs 2 match up if there are 2 guys who are widely seen as being 1 and 2.

But I don't see why that has to be the only way especially if you consider the title vacant after Vitali(if you think he was the actual lineal champ) or even longer if you consider Lewis the last lineal champ. Those guys had been gone for 4-5 years by the time Wlad beat Sultan.

By the time Wlad beat Sultan I think he was clearly the top man at heavyweight. It had been years since the title was filled so what's the point of waiting for a 1 vs 2 when Wlad was clearly the best and there was far from an agreement who was #2. Vitali was retired and Peter, Maskaev, Rahman, and Toney all spent time being the second best heavyweight in the years leading up to Wlad-Sultan.

In a 2-3 year period. Wlad beat an undefeated Peter in an eliminator. He beat the #1 guy in Byrd for a title which placed Wlad as the #1 heavyweight himself.

Then he defeated top 5ish Brock, Austin, Brewster(last guy to beat him) and then unified with top 5 and undefeated Sultan. Wlad was clearly the best heavyweight in the world at this point and had been for a couple years.

The other top heavies at the time Wlad was sitting as the top guy from the Byrd win to Sultan were:

Peter- Wlad beat him a few years prior and he beat Toney the first time in a fight a lot thought he lost.
Maskaev- No one really thought he was better than Wlad and had been inactive for 14 months when Wlad beat Sultan.
Toney- beaten clearly in the Peter rematch
Valuev-lost to Chagaev
Chagaev-the only guy at the time who you could really make any kind of argument that he deserved the top heavyweight spot and few would have put him ahead of Wlad.

So if Wlad isn't the clear top heavyweight in the world at this point then who was? And if he's the best and has been for a while why keep waiting to say a new lineage hasn't started.

 

Precisely the double-standard I'm referring to. Sanders, at best, was no. 3.

How can Vitali be named lineal champ when fighting No. 3, when people also say that Wlad can't have been lineal until Vitali retired?

 

Another good example, and in that case I believe The Ring belt was actually awarded to RJJ without beating Dariusz.

In that case, though, I'm not sure how he was ever really considered lineal in the first place though - Virgil Hill's lineal status is as shaky as it comes, I think.

 

Vitali has never been the champion. Seems people have suddenly pulled his name out of thin air.

 

Maybe you have amnesia?

 

Sometimes the Ring match the #1 and #3 for the their title, but why should a magazine opinion change anything for you :huh? Can you not make a decision on any of this? Just because a magazine calls someone champ.

There are posters who look at Stevenson as champ for beating a fighter coming off a stoppage loss, all because someone says so.

Not sure if it will change your opinion again, but the V Klitschko, C Sanders fight was for the vacant Ring HW title, so Vitali was the champ with the Ring, but still not sure why any of that matters