When and with who did Larry Holmes become lineal champion?

From Norton he was the best HW, but from the Ali fight he was considered the true champ.

Think of it a 1v2, unification or passing of the torch.

Ali was the retired WBA and World HW champion. If beating him doesn't crown a new champ it certainly passes the torch for the former to the latter.

 

Holmes pretty much attained undisputed status in March 1980 when Weaver beat Tate for the WBA crown. By virtue of Holmes' victory over Weaver nine months earlier he was recognized as THE champ. Ring Magazine recognized him as champ from this point forward.

Holmes cemented his lineal status with the victory over retired previous champ Ali, much like Johnson cemented his status by beating retired champ Jeffries, Charles by beating Louis, and Frazier by beating previously retired Ali in 1971.

Johnson, Charles, Frazier, and Holmes were already champions. When they beat the previous titleholders they confirmed their status as lineal world heavyweight champion.

 

He was probably best when he beat Norton. Hard to say if he was the best until he lost the title as he had a few disputed calls goes his way (and never rematched), never unified with the WBA champs and rarely faced the best fighters in the division.

 

All of this is a great example of why this silly "lineal champion" nonsense isn't worth following. It's a paper thing that has little application to the real question of whom is the best fighter holding a belt. There's usually little question as to whom that is, so which fighter took which bauble from which fighter that beat another fighter is pointless.

 

I think it's nonsense right now for the same reason I thought it nonsense 6 years ago. It has no prestige.

If there was a globally recognised champion and everyone knew they had to beat him to be the next champion it would be a great step forward.

 

.....sweetsc has the explanation for this question. this was at a time when recognition by ring magazine and nat flesicher had major influence in boxing, especially in deciding championships .

 

well said :good

 

When Ali retired and the WBA had their tournament, Larry Holmes became the real champion in the eyes of most people. But, I guess he became true lineal champ when he beat Ali, who had never lost his title he had regained from Leon Spinks.

 

Hmm I said here it was 1v2, did Ali actually keep his ranking after retiring?

If not can beating a retired champion really pass on the lineage? If yes why didn't it happen with Sammy Angott who retired his claim for 4 months be free returning?

Is a strict 1v2 rule fair or should it be more case by case?

If it is case by case does that leave too much grey area?

Conversely does a strict rule really matter if the general consensus is that he was champion anyways, as is the case with Holmes?

Do people even care about lineage any more?

 

There were those who argued that beating Shavers cemented it.

 

Holmes v Shavers was 1v3, not 1v2.

Aside from beating Ali his claim is weak.

A rematch with Weaver would have sealed it, r a unification with Coetzee.

 

Here's the Ring take, via their ratings, from early 1980:

The Ring - May 1980
March 1, 1980

Champion:
title vacant
1. Larry Holmes (WBC)
2. John Tate (WBA)
3. Mike Weaver
4. Gerrie Coetzee
5. Earnie Shavers
6. Leroy Jones
7. Leon Spinks
8. Gerry ****ey
9. Michael Dokes
10. Jimmy Young
11. Scott LeDoux
12. Mike Koranicki
13. Osvaldo Ocasio
14. Marty Monroe
15. Willie Shannon


The Ring - June 1980
April 1, 1980

Champion:
Larry Holmes (WBC)
1. Mike Weaver (WBA)
2. John Tate
3. Gerrie Coetzee
4. Michael Dokes
5. Gerry ****ey
6. Leroy Jones
7. Bernardo Mercado
8. Leon Spinks
9. Scott LeDoux
10. Jimmy Young
11. Earnie Shavers
12. Muhammad Ali
13. Eddie Lopez
14. Osvaldo Ocasio
15. Greg Page

BTW, I've said in other discussions that I don't view Ring or anyone else as be-all-end-all. But they did take a fairly reasonable position at this time, IMO.

Ring's current rules now allow for the winner of a 1 vs. 3 contest to determine their champion. In that case Holmes earned it against Shavers.

Personally in this case I go with Ring's decision at the time - Holmes became champion when the other claimant lost to a recent Holmes victim. Holmes solidified his championship by beating previous retired champion Ali. Much like Frazier became champion by beating other claimant Ellis and solidified his claim by beating previous retired champion Ali.

(Of course the problem is Holmes didn't beat Weaver when Weaver was the other title claimant.)