The term "Undisputed Champion" is not logical

This is why undisputed champs should always have a rematch clause.

But have faith the cab driver that beats the champ will not be seen as great unless he defends it. Like Buster Douglas who won it and lost it in 1 fight. No one will see him as a real undisputed.

 

A lot of boxing isn't logical really, it's just marketing. Business.

Same with most areas of human achievement when you think about it. Does a Gold medal mean much inherently when there's so much corruption, or where there's less competition some games, or injuries and whatever can prevent the better athlete winning?
Does winning an award in art, film, music, even the sciences mean much when they're obviously the result of politics and public pressure most of the time rather than intelligent critical analysis?
It's nice being recognised by a title or award or medal but ultimately there are better ways to assess achievement and superiority.

 

If you win the fight you should win the prize, otherwise there would be even more weight given to having a famous name rather than performance on fight night.

But I do really like this idea of having distinctions for someone who cleared out the division.

I'd like to propose the 5x5 (5 by 5) champ, 5 wins over 5 different top 5 (at the time of the fight) opponents.

You could naturally be a 10x10 or a 15x15 champ, or someone could go from prospect to contender when they get the 5x20 distinction.

 

I always wonder why people are calling not highly ranked and marketed guys as cab drivers?
As a for of some sense of superiority and wish to bite someone?
If you do not know someone he automatically is a cab driver?
A lot of ppl ranked approx 100 th might be up coming prospects and / or fulltime hardcore gym rats. Some from them are working in gyms.
Ofc people are coming from different walks of life and it is old road to call fighting as road out of poverty. Depends where you are.
I know some ppl ranked approx like this with legit Uni level degrees.

I normally think that majority of ppl does not know " cab drivers ".
The same small hall shows: some lad is working, maybe even in gym and selling tickets and he automatically is " cab driver " if not marketed by big mass media enough.
Congratulations, nobody bum was future world champ later. Cab driver for sure, 0 doubts.

Well, 1 single medal maybe not but if it is done during long years?
Imagine how you might feel how " caveman " level prime Bet is in the am ring for example?
Maybe Foreman etc.

Yeah for sure. For example to install these street fight internet experts with some kind of Buakaw.
Or just for internet posters "only cab driver" who was not down in fight vs his younger versions. Might look damn cool assessment.
If good and proper insurance.

 

Undisputed champ literally means you're the only champ in the division, hence your status as THE champ of that division is undisputed. Not really that much to it, I think you lack some reasoning to fail to realise this.

 

Undisputed, Lineal, all this billsh!t exists because of the alphabet belt era. There can only be one "world champion". That is the real taxonomic problem. It also created the duck and milk problem where a boxer can duck rhe best boxers on the way to winning one of the "world champion" belts, and then duck the best and milk the gravy train.

 

Depends on which way you interpret it - but IMO the basic (and most obvious) is perfectly logical.
e.g.

Josh Taylor is Undisputed @140 - give he has all the top tier belts for all the governing bodies, there is no other titlist @140 that can dispute his claim to being THE champ.

Saul Canelo Alvarez is unified champ @168 (with Ring, WBO,WBC,WBA) but Caleb Plant can dispute this claim given he holds the IBF belt.

Once Canelo bludgeons the IBF strap away from Plant in November, Plant can no longer dispute his claim to being THE champ @168.

If Catterall in December beats TTT, or god forbid Plant does the unthinkable and takes Canelo's belt, then logically they will be undisputed - simply because there are no other champs to dispute the claim.

 

What? This isn't tennis where you get points for winning tournaments and the person with the most at the end of the season is rated on top.

If you beat the world champ you become the world champ.

This generation of fans just can't seem to wrap their heads around a simple and clear concept.

The top 15 is always changing particularly the ones near the bottom.

Why should a guy at the top who knocked off the world champ not be listed as world champ because the names at the bottom are always changing?

It is about beating the top dog, not beating half the guys who aren't the best.

 

" If he's undisputed, what's all the fighting about" - George Carlin

 

Exactly. Undisputed means what it says... You can't dispute that the fighter is THE champion, even if there is another titlist in the same division.

 

This is actually a really good idea. Somebody should rank the top 10 in several different categories. Like x20, x15, x10, x5, x3

 

When you say someone, do you mean someone on here, or an organization?

Also what is the top ten? Boxrec? PBO? The Ring? TBRB? The governing bodies (IBF/WBC/WBO/WBA)?

 

It would start off at the ranker’s discretion and then afterwards use ranks according to the list itself.

 

Oh I see, this would be a long term project.

Just to clarify, is this a list of fighters ranked by the number of top ten wins.
Or is this a list of champions with top ten defences?

I'm happy to give it a go for the heavyweights as a bit of fun this morning. But just so I know what to look at.