Why do people say "Lineal" when they mean "Ring"

It's not debatable, and it's not "who I judge to be more worthy". It's based on the fact that Chagaev was WBA Champ and Wlad was IBF, WBO and IBO Champ. At the time, Vitali had just come back from a long retirement to win the single WBC Title. Vitali had no claim to the Lineal Title before he retired, and his brother held more major world titles than him. Chagaev's status as WBA Champ elevated the bout to Lineal status. Vitali was fighting Juan Carlos Gomez, while Wladimir was fighting Chagaev, who became the Man by defeating the Monster known as Valuev.

There was no comparison between Vitali vs Gomez and Wladimir vs Chagaev. Wladimir vs Chagaev was much, much, much bigger to the division and thus was deemed the fight to re-establish a Lineal Champion.

 

I just want to add that you're entitled to your opinion. You are free to debate who you think was more worthy, however that doesn't change that Wlad became Lineal and Ring Champ. Vitali's win over Peter was big, but remember he was coming off a long retirement and that fight was not for the Lineal or the Ring Title.

As much as you disagree, Wladimir vs Chagaev was Lineal. That fact is not debatable, of course you're free to make your argument as to why Wlad - Chagaev shouldn't have been Lineal, but I've explained to you why it was. There were more major Titles involved. Wladimir had established dominance of the division while Vitali was retired and inactive. Had Vitali not retired in 2004, he may have became Lineal, as he was already the Ring Champion, but that didn't happen. Another factor was that it was clear that the two brothers were never going to fight each other.

 

Fair enough! Good on ya

 

Well, in that case Gene Tunney was the last lineal heavyweight champion. He retired undefeated in 1928 and never came back.

 

You have your own definition of what Lineal is. The Lineal Championship is a straight line between Champions in a division than can be traced back as far as possible that represents who "The Man" of a division is.

Where you disagree and where most of the confusion stems from is what constitutes the creation of a new lineage after a Lineal Champion retires or is no longer able to defend the Championship any longer. In this case, Lennox Lewis, who beat Vitali, retired in 2004. So therefore, the Lineal Title was vacant. Vitali then captured the vacant Ring Title, but not the Lineal Title. (do you understand that?) It wasn't Lineal because it was not a unification fight, it was not a big enough matchup to warrent the Lineal Title. Can I ask you a question : Do you feel as though Vitali vs Corrie Sanders should have been for the Lineal Championship as well as the Ring Title (as it was)?? Please answer this question, so I can gauge where you think Vitali should have won the Lineal Title as you are arguing.

I'm trying to inform you that it takes more than just your own personal opinion as to who you think is deserving of a re-established Lineal Title when it is vacant. Do you concede that a match consisting of a champion with 2 major titles vs a champion with 1 major title is more deserving of Lineality than a match consisting of a champion with only 1 major title vs a challenger with no titles coming out of a nearly 4 year retirement?

Please explain when you thought Vitali should have became Lineal Champion? Vs Sanders in 2004 which was for the vacant WBC Title or vs Peter in 2008 which Peter was defending the WBC Title? And please explain how you can crown a new Lineal Champion in that fight with only a single title on the line while his brother held TWO Major Heavyweight Titles at that time, along with another minor one??

 

By your own logic, not Gene Tunney, but rather James J. Jeffries, who retired in 1905 as the Heavyweight Champ, was the last Lineal Heavyweight Champ, right? If you're going to make this argument, at least be accurate.

Of course neither Jeffries or Tunney was the last Lineal Heavyweight Champion, but rather were was the last Lineal Heavyweight Champion of that specific Lineage. After Tunney retired in 1928, then in 1930 a new Lineal Champ was crowned in the vacant HW Title match between Max Schmeling and Jack Sharkey. Max Schmeling started a new lineage which lasted until Joe Louis retired. Do you see how this works? One lineage ends when the champ retires or is no longer able to defend in that weight class, then after a period of time, another lineage starts.

 

There weren't as many belts then as there were now, but there were two major ones. There was the World Championship and also the NBA (National Boxing Association) Title which was established in 1921, which became the WBA in 1962.

 

Rings Lineal makes sense. Lineal became a thing when multiple belts came along to show us who the proper champion was. The Rings ruleset is a more modern, updated version with the same goal.