Haye was never undisputed champ at cruiser

I think we will all agree in this thread that even if David didn't have the whole collection of major abc belts, he really can be regarded ( because he had a collect 3 of those titles, and 4 would have just been a numeracy issue.. and even mister Cunningham would not dispute he had the true stranglehold on the division.. ) David was the numero uno, and if the word undisputed , truly means that no one of his peers disputes his claim of being the best , then no-one disputed his claim , leaving his legacy as purely that , undisputed by those important in the game.....

 

The nuthuggers come out of the woodwork whenever someone posts something less than favorable about Haye.

 

I am no Haye butt muncher this about any fighter who unifies and then gets striped buy the bull**** abc org's and then is not called undisputed.
He is still undisputed until he loses in the ring to the better man

 

well..i'm with the blade on this one.

 

David Haye was not stripped of the IBF title, he never had it. BTW - how long was his 'reign' as the 'CW King?'

 

If you had read my other post you would have not have put that reply please read the thread before you answer

 

IMO when you beat THE MAN in a division you become the undisputed champ. The ABC's are too currupt to allow an undisputed WBC, WBO, WBA and IBF World champ to reign for a significant amount of time, so when you beat the best you become the best. Look at Pavlik, too me he is the undisputed middleweight champ. Pavlik beat JT who was the man before that JT beat BHOP who was the man who had all 4 belts. Pavlik has a major rival yes but at the end of the day that title is a paper title until it gets unified.

Haye defeated the man at cruiserweight to become top dog, uss was someone who made very little noise about fighting haye during that time..(I know he claimed to want to fight Haye but was there any offers?)

 

uhm Bell never lost the IBF belt in the ring, hence Cunningham was a paper title holder with no relevence.

You're not even undisputed if you don't hold the WBO so I don't know why people still pretend the other 3 are the belts to unify with. The IBF shouldn't have even been recognised in the first place.

 

Listen I know what your trying to get at, Haye didnt win the IBF title so hes not the undisputed champ. But if you say that had a right to dispute because he was the IBF champ then the IBO, IBA, WBU, WBF, NABO, NABA, OPBF and all title holders should have a right to dispute any clame of being the undisputed champ. So then there have never been any undisputed champions because they never held EVERY SINGLE TITLE IN THEIR DIVISION.

 

The problem with your post is that the NABO, NABA, NABF etc. are REGIONAL titles and not WORLD titles.

 

So basically he wasnt the 'Undisputed Champ',.

But he was beyond dispute, the man at Cruiserweight, holder of 5 of the 6 recognized trinkets and the recognised best at that weight.

Ok.

 

I know, but THE BLADE is trying to say that just because Haye didnt hold A title he wasnt the undisputed champ, I'm trying to say that if thats the case then every title holder (World or otherwise) has the right to dispute any clame to the undisputed champ.

 

I mentioned dispute as something in Undisputed boxing terms is something that only a figure of importance as a peer of Davids has a right to, be it a Championship committee chairman, a proper governing body host.. or anyone who is regarded as a higher presidential person and respected as such.. Not some man with some outside interest sat in his armchair taking commission for his plastic NabO strap.. Holding three proper belts and the one unsecured in the hands of a guy who i honestly know probably wouldn't have disputed the claim that David was the boss in the cruiserweights at that point.. Cunningham has always held Haye in high esteem btw.. I think the argument of WBC, WBA, IBF is how we used to regard undisputed.. but i suppose if he had only 2 belts i would have said , hold on there are 2 other proper bodies with solid champs who may have something to say about this, but Haye did have 3 good solid titles.. WBO being legit unlike say 15 years ago.. remember Benn, Eubank, Bowe, Hearns were all WBO Champions and i say its now a proper title as too is the IBF.. Haye never had the IBF .. so if this one is a semantics issue , he wasn't undisputed statistically .. But peers of the man in question never disputed his claim as being the universally acknowledged best cruiserweight in the world at that time with 3 proper titles around his waste.. God bless... a lot of you all really better agree to disagree .. its very opinionated amongst a few of you in here today..