Lineal explained by someone who actually knows.

New lineage? Not yet.

 

Considering the whole concept of 'lineal' means there is always a lineal champ....

Are you suggesting as there is no 'new lineage', that Fury is still the current lineal champ?

 

Basically it comes down to this: who would you rank higher during the summer of 2009, Vitali Klitschko or Ruslan Chagaev.

 

Sorry but no. As long as Fury is out of the picture, Joshua can't call himself lineal until he beats Wilder..

 

You can make that argument as there is precedent. IIRC, Jack Dempsey sat on the lineal HW title for 3 years.

 

Why does Joshua have to beat Wilder to be lineal?

Wilder has never been in the ring with a lineal champ before.....

 

One could argue that not a single nickname there is appropriate.

 

I never got this line of thinking. Vitali was still reigning WBC titlist. He didn't retire until later in the year, December I think. If he was number 2 in 2009, why not in 2013? Just because we now know he retired after that?

But it doesn't matter anyway. Wlad has so many claims to being the clear number 1, that only a fool can say he didn't re-establish the lineage. Byrd (number 1 HW at the time), Ibragimov (becoming the first unified title holder since Lennox), Chagaev (number 1 vs number 2/3), Haye (number 1 vs number 3), Povetkin (number 1 vs number 2/3), Pulev (number 1 vs number 2). He captured 3 out of 4 belts, The Ring title, TBRB title, in 2008 the WBC strap was won by Samuel Peter - a guy already beaten by him, and after Vitali dropped the same WBC belt in Dec 2013 and retired, he became practically undisputed. He couldn't do much more.