Since Usyk gave up the belts without retiring, does the lineage start anew?

This is a unique situation no? So, does he keep the lineage when he gave up all belts without retiring? Sort of seems like a new lineage begins for each belt he gave up.

 

Yes Barrf, it will re-start when #1 and 2 or #1 and 3 fight......................

 

He still keeps the lineage and a valid claim to every alphabet belt. He's still recognized as the champion by The Ring and TBRB. Until he retires he's the man.*

It's not that unique to be honest. First lineal champions didn't even hold any belts, cause belts didn't exist in the form we are familair with now. And even in the alphabet era, Foreman still was the lineal champion despite being stripped/vacating his belts. So was Fury until he lost to Usyk. So was Ali until he retired in February 1970. So was Spinks after getting stripped by the IBF.

*There may be a situation that Usyk continues to fight for so long facing trash opposition that the new consensus champion arises, so his claim may fizzle out. But we're not even close to this happening and it never happened at HW.

 

This is why lineage is a load of bollocks

 

It's not. It's the traditional wold championship. Hate it or love it, it's better than the alphabet soup and has almost 150 years of history.

 

Not until Usyk fights. When Foreman dropped the belts, Bowe faced Holyfield in the trilogy fight while they were considered number 1 and number 2 HWs in the world. He even got the New York Times belt. Nobody considered Bowe the new lineal champion tho.

 

We'll just agree to disagree

 

No. He needs to retire.

 

Correct. It's not only "not that unique" ... it seems to have happened about once a decade at heavyweight for the last 50 or 60 years.

Once a guy becomes universally recognized as heavyweight champ ... seems to be a pattern that they decide they'll fight who they wish and the orgs be damned.

Usyk remains the champ until he loses or retires for good.

Newer fans tend to not realize that most of boxing history is written years later once the dust settles. Instead of people jumping in at a moment's notice to make major proclamation, or citing this rule or that ... just wait a bit and see how the dust settles.

The "champion" is still active.

Titles should be won and lost in the ring. Not by "consensus" or because of some "rules" someone made up. We've already been through this multiple times with Usyk, where he'll be told to do something, drops a belt, does what he wants, than picks up the same belt again.

If Usyk says he's still fighting ... and no one has beaten him ... he's still the champ.

When Usyk loses, he won't be. 99 percent of the time, it shouldn't be any more complicated than that.

In the meantime, let the other belts get passed around. He's already beaten half the belt holders already in fairly dominant fashion.

 

The only exception to this rule recently was Wlad. He was still fighting top contenders at the age of 39.

 

I’m curious if the sanctioning bodies will rank him since he’s not retired and perhaps still has some sanctioning fees unexpired (not that I know how it works)

 

Right. Wlad was the rare champ who collected belts and primarily just based his fight schedule around fighting mandatories. But he and his brother had their own promotional company, and they had lucrative German TV deals, so Wlad made a fortune no matter who he fought.

Unlike some, Wlad wasn't so concerned about skipping a mandatory (who wouldn't generate much fan interest) because he'd "make more" fighting someone else. Wlad made about the same no matter who he fought. So, he primarily just fought who the orgs presented. (That's the only reason why Tony Thompson got two title fights with Wlad and Alex Leapai one. Not because they offered anything to the promotion. They were just mandatories.)

Most champs didn't have deals like that. So, they'd fight who paid most, and then fight with the orgs who wanted them to fight whoever they deemed.

In that way, Wlad was the ideal champion for the boxing orgs. But it wasn't because they were offering great opponents. He had his own deals so no matter what dreck they told him to fight, he'd make same. It didn't matter to him.

 

That's true and this is goes to prove the theory that "nobody wanted to watch Wlad" is BS. He wouldn't make so much money for fighting some trash mandatories (he also had some top level mandatories like Chambers, Povetkin, Pulev, Fury) if he didn't have a following and couldn't sell. Still, he didn't drop belts like many others and we should give him props for that.

 

They won't rank him. They tend not to rank active fighters who vacate their belts. And their ratings, which are always a question mark, will look even more stupid when he isn't included but still active.

It's one reason why I finally swore off the Ring ratings for good. Tyson Fury announced he was retiring (for the umpteenth time) a couple years ago, even relinquished the Ring belt (which I never thought you could "vacate") ... and said he was retired.

Then, within hours, he was actively seeking a new opponent. In that case, the WBC actually was the only one who basically said we're still recognizing him. Then Fury fought a few months later against Chisora. But the Ring and the other orgs all jumped on a vacant title fight between Usyk and Joshua. They were in such a hurry.

Again, just let things sit for a bit. Usyk could wait a couple months, then call out Kabayel, just like he did last time he vacated and then turned around and fought Dubois again. He's getting fickle in his old age

 

Well, nobody in the US wanted to watch him. His HBO ratings plummeted. That's why a lot of his later defenses were either not televised here by HBO or they were picked up at a bargain rate by ESPN at the last minute.

If he didn't have that good German TV deal, he'd have been more discerning about who he fought, too. But he made the same for most fights, so it didn't matter to him.