30 title defenses automatically becomes the greatest of all time ?

Which other you see as lineal who didn't fight the other top guy out theere for that long?

And we should count until Vitaly retired, of course. But even for 3 plus years who else since Dempsey?

Yes, Wlad was nr 1. but not lineal when Vitaly returned. And Vitaly, being the previous Ring champion and outclassing Peter like that was clearly the other top guy out there.

 

Well, Vitali didn't want to fight him, so he couldn't fight him. He beat every top contender willing to face him.

The consensus among boxing fraternity is, Wlad has been the lineal champion since June 2009. Peter was already eliminated previously, so Vitali's win over him doesn't matter that much in the picture. Chagaev had better wins at that point.

 

You still won't answer the question if anyone had gone so long without facing the other top guy out there since Dempsey? Not, in what, five tries? Well, pretty clear what your answer is then.

Vitaly retiring as Ring Champion, with a win over someone who starched Wlad, and then coming back and doing what Wlad hadn't been able to do to Peter, trumps Chagaev's SD over Ruiz and MD over Valuev imo. But I know that there are many who recognize Wlad-Chagaev as lineal. Doubtful for me, and at best the weakest claim to lineal ever. I don't know how many recognized Charles as lineal after beating Walcott (The Ring didn't), but Walcott was still a better opponent for it than Chagaev imo. As was Hart, with an official W over Johnson.

So if given the benefit of a doubt, 11 defences for Wlad with the majority in the weakest claim to lineage ever.

I'll leave it at that.

 

A fighters fight frequency is too low these days for these type of stats to be trumped.

 

I like the multiple titles route. as a self professed *****sexual, I put more importance on moving up in weight classes since you might have an outstanding holder in another weight class rather than just ruling a class of mediocrities as we saw throughout the 1930s and 1940s in the heavyweight division

 

I don't mean to shout, but I want to emphasis:

"JOE LOUIS' RECORD IS FOR 25 AT UNDISPUTED."

Depends entirely on the specifics whether anyone could get to 30. A lot of these guys could easily get to 30 by holding one belt and fighting light competition. But that would be a DIFFERENT record. That would be 30 OF ANY TITLE.

Joe Louis' record will stand forever.

 

Counting Golovkin's WBA regular defences in comparison to Louis's 25 should result in a ban, no? Wlad's WBO defences aren't much better tbf.

 

Today no because of 4 belts and tweeners which make long reigns much more attainable. Arthur Abrahamesque careers with 10x defenses are more common. And someone getting to 30 would not mean what it once would have.

No magic number makes a fighter the GOAT. Details are what matter.

 

Didn't Louis famously have his "bum of the month" club. All credit to Joe but I can't imagine a current reigning champ being given much grace to fight those who weren't legit challengers.

 

So how exactly would that work? Let's say you have Mike Jones and Mike wins the WBO on his 20th fight. Then on his 27th fight he unifies with the IBF and becomes the Ring champion. On his 30th fight he gets the WBA. And finally on his 33rd fight he gets the WBC and becomes undisputed. Mike has an amazing career and gets to 50-0. Does he have 30 undisputed title defenses? Or does he have 17? Or something else?

 

17. He wasn't undisputed all of the time.

It would still be a record...even a good one. Just not Joe Louis'.

 

So you are punishing a fighter because of the addition of sanctioning bodies? That doesn't seem fair.

 

1) I'm not punishing anyone. Like I said, it would be a record, even a good one, just a different one.

2) No one had to overcome more than Joe Louis in being a black man and being exciting enough but retrained enough to get a title shot. He also lost valuable years during the war, fighting hundreds of exhibitions that could have been counted as real fights. He also beat Lee Savold, who was recognized by the British Boxing Board as a champion, and received no such recognition. These are all obstacles that "Mike Jones" won't have to face. So he has earned the right for his undisputed fights to be counted only against other undisputed.

 

I highly doubt it. Omar Andrés Narváez equaled Julio César Chávez’s world title win record, yet no one really mentions him because his level of competition was.... well to not swear, let's just say "lacking".

T reach something like 30 title defenses, you need several rare factors to line up.

First, you need a highly active boxer. That means someone disciplined, dedicated, and constantly hungry for fighting and greatness, which is extremely rare in today’s era (sadly)

Second, he has to be elite in terms of skill. Either good enough to outbox opponents consistently without taking much punishment, or powerful enough to stop them early before the wear and tear starts adding up.

Third, you need a division, or even multiple divisions, willing to stay active and actually face the champion regularly. That is also extremely rare in today's era (sadly x2)

On top of that, those divisions need to be filled with solid B- to A-level fighters (im looking at you 2020s Heavyweight) so the champion can build a resume with credible wins , not just defenses for the sake of numbers (Yes, this is a diss to the klitschkos).

If any of these factors are missing, the achievement loses weight.

I honestly doubt we will ever see an era where all of this lines up again, especially in today’s boxing landscape, that is filled with PUSSYCATS.

 

Keeping up with this discussion I wonder if anyone here could actually agree to how many title defenses Bernard Hopkins had at middleweight?