Should becoming Undisputed automatically make you Lineal Champ?

problem is an undisputed champ gets his belts taken from him by federations who want their mandatory fought above the others
greedy, self-indulgent federations and their belts are the reason big fights aren't made fairly and why b-grade fighters like guerrero and sturm can be 4/5 time 'world champions' by taking the path of least resistance
it may be a pipe dream, but I look forward to the day when the federations are wiped off the face of their earth, and their belts thrown in the trash where they belong

 

At the top level I think you sometimes have to take titles and lineages with a pinch of salt and use common sense (sadly lacking a lot of the time) to decide who the best in a division is.

 

This. Theoretically somebody like Canelo could skip directly to 168, never fight at 160 again and be the lineal 160 champion forever more, when he never actually even won the 160 title at the 160 weight limit.

Lineal champion is worth trash in such a scenario. That's because there's no mechanism to force the "lineal champion" to defend his imaginary "lineal belt".

IMO the lineage dies when the holder of the lineage declines to defend at the weight against his mandatory for whatever belt he won together with the lineal championship. Such an act of gross cowardice says to me that the lineal champion relinquishes his lineage because he knows he will be beaten and is dodging the loss.

 

I'm not a fan of lineal titles, either. Historically they weren't even necessarily held by the best of the best. The champ is the one who's seem informally as the champ of the division aka Golovkin at MW.

 

Yes, because if you are undisputed it means the lineal champion has either retired, vacated, or moved to another division.

 

That's the only way lineals have ever begun. Someone had to always start off the lineal title by being undisputed.

 

I don't really care about the lineal, i care more about the undisputed champion, but boxing doesn't have one since 2006, so...

 

True Lineal titles get broken all the time. The guy who beat the guy etc.. Any champion who retires after a win will break that.

 

Indeed. Who cared about Spinks when Tyson was the undisputed champion?! I heard a lot of who's (actually wie's) when they finally fought eachother.
It's so extremely hard to make it to undisputed nowadays (more due to politics, greed and ducking as skillevel) that it hasn't happened for a decade now.

No lineal line is still pure anyway. Sometimes different publications have different "lineal" champions, which defeats the whole purpose.

 

I can't tell if you know what 'linear' means James. The lineage tends to follow who the recognized World Champion is, not just go with a titleholder here and there.

 

Yeah i didn't feel comfortable calling Canelo THE middleweight champion.

 

Certainly as he never fought at the full weight, won it against a guy who never fought at the full weight either, who won it from a guy that shouldn't have it anymore. It's one big farce.

 

Who is recognizing these champ? For starters, their organization. And use the word titleholder, or beholder, because that's what they are all, unless there's a recognized World champion (And there's only ever one, all the time).

When a linear champ retires, or relinquished their hold due to moving to another weight class, then in most cases, there are rules to allow a new lineage. Unification, as you are suggesting, is one way, and if often what it comes to anyway, so it's not really an issue for me.

But what is your determination on being undisputed? Which belts do you think a fighter should hold to be considered undisputed?