Lineal explained by someone who actually knows.

True but is there a sub clause that stipulates this is kinda shaky ground if the un-retired fighter went over 350lbs during his retirement?

And what if he had lost a arm in a boating accident and was coming back with only one arm? Would you still rank him lineal or would you wait on it?

 

My only point is that with even 1 title not unified Joshua can't be called a lineal champion. What GTH posted says it all. I differ on some things with the MOQ rules, but they are the rules.

Having a majority of trinkets does not make him even a choice or consideration. He must fight Wilder or the WBC champion to have a case. That is my only point.

For Ring mag to even consider Joshua as a lineal champion if he beats Parker sets a bad precedent for boxing. Now if it's just some Ring belt fine, but Joshua can't be called a lineal champion until he fights the WBC champion.

 

Stop talking out of your ass. Fury beat Klitschko and looked better doing it than Joshua did.

 

I think GtK is conferring (rightly or wrongly) emeritus status on Fury (as in he can annul his retirement anytime before death and unravel whatever contingency lineage has been established in his absence), something for which you could argue precedent does exist.

 

Yes and there's a reason for that.

Klitschko attempted to beat Joshua. He didn't attempt to beat Fury.

 

Incorrect.

The Alphabet Org's trinkets have *nothing* to do with lineage of the HW title. Fury is *the* Champion @ HW until he retires for good or is beaten. The WBC/BA/IBF/Etc have NO say in the matter...

 

I think you can confirm lineage by defeating the previous incumbent, even if that individual had previously retired; but that doesn't automatically detract from or eliminate new lineage that might have been established in the interim.

For example, Burns is considered to be a lineal champion. In my opinion, rightfully so. The fact that Jeffries came back after he lost his championship to Johnson doesn't invalidate his reign or status as a legit heavyweight champ.

 

Well at some point if the lineal champions can no longer defend his title through retirement, death or whatever, you would assume that the title would then be fought for between the number 1 and 2 contenders.
The winner could in those circumstances call himself the lineal champion, but the problem is who decides who the legitimate numbers 1 and 2 are?
Once a lineal champion doesn’t lose his title in the ring, it could be claimed “lineal” is kaput!

 

Sure--Fury has "unretired", or so he says. But he hasnt actually gotten back in the ring yet. Until he is actually back in the ring, he is still retired. And to be honest, he may not ever fight again.

 

@GlaukosTheHammer Did you get that thing I sent you?

 

I really appreciate that. I've actually been struggling to put it in words, sometimes comes off too gushy, others I kind of seem like a dick. So I'll just say thanks bud and leave it.

I'm sorry, I don't actually see a difference. I mean I don't see any conflict.

Fury, when he retired, allowed a new lineal champion to be crowned just as much as Ward allowed Burke to be crowned. Then Ward came out of retirement to nerf the Burke reign or restart if you will. Fury coming out of retirement means that Joshua was never the lineal champion, but when Fury was retired Joshua was the lineal champion. I understand how those ideas are contradictory and that's why I say you can't know until it's history.

So if I was to write a lineal list right now it'd have no mention of Joshua. Had I written it pre Tyson's return it would have, and if Lennox wants to come out of retirement too he nixes everyone who came after him.

I'm open to suggestion. I'll read on, I see the convo's gone on for sometime, but if there's something specific you wanted to tell me I'm all ears.

The lineal since its inception is an idea that is meant to clarify one champion. Whether it does or not is debatable, this thread is very much a testament to it adding to the confusion rather than eliminating it, but the idea is still there. What I'm saying is I do not think we'd even be talking about lineal champions if it wasn't for the spread of sanctioning body titles. The purpose is to pick one of the multiple champions as the singular champion to continue the singular lineage as purely as possible.

That said, I personally believe there must always be a lineal champion or no champion whatsoever. I guess I took away the opposite as you. You are saying must have all four belts to be lineal right? I think more it's all four belts must be vacant for there to be no lineal solely based on the 1970's inception being caused by the WBA and WBC not agreeing.

I'd be curious to know how you square away Wlad's lineal status with undisputed status, or would you say he was never lineal?

You're saying he's not been cleared and registered yet? As long as Tyson is back in boxing he is the lineal. I think Blizzy's undisputed has more bearing than the idea that he retired so that ended his line and now a new has begun. He did retire, and that did end his line for a time, but now he's back and that new line whether you reckon AJ, Wilder, or vacant or some such, is now defunct and Tyson's reign continues.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It is not my call to tell youse who is lineal. All I can do is lay out the history and try to explain how we got here. As far as my opinion of that history I'm just as flawed as anyone else. I don't want to come off as someone telling everyone who is and isn't lineal so much as explain the rules as I know them so that you guys can form your opinions on a more informed base. I think in that regard this thread is a massive success.

Honestly, I don't really have a horse in this race and lineal before it's controlled by any precedence or tradition comes down to who the fans acknowledge. If some weird movement swept the net to name Floyd the lineal HW champion no matter how ****ing wrong that is it'd be the case because there is no authority on lineal.

It's like that anonymous movement from a few years back. No present authority means even the most informed know it all ******* has to wait on the public and history to make a decision.

Personally I know there are a number of times I would have made the wrong call and would have guess a different history being recorded. Post Tunney was a cluster ****. Hell the whole colorline is a cluster **** to this very day. I don't think Carnera would have even been champion had the public and industry not upheld the colorline.