Will you consider the Wlad-Haye Superfight winner to be "World Heavyweight Champion"?

wlad already is the champ, haye is a beltholder, the winner will either still be the champ or new champion. If haye is abe to win then him vs vitali really really has too happen.

 

No the winner is just number 1 ranked heavyweight. The winner would need to face the winner of vitali - adamek to create a new lineage

 

The linear champ, yes!

 

Wlad is already the man at this division.. I see Haye as another contender...

 

I was in favor of Ring's choice to allow Wlad/Chag to be for their title and consider Wlad linear and Vitali/Haye to be only belt holders. One man unified, one man has been active as a titlist, unbroken in the division for five years, one man has Ring recognition who's been fighting either mandatories or Ring ranked guys...Wladimir is the champion. Most have come around to calling him linear even given the unique circumstances and I'm included. Frankly, if you don't consider Wlad linear from what he's done, you have no grounds to say he's linear after Haye, who is in no different a position as Chagaev was in. Ring no. 3 with the WBA belt and the general consensus second best (Vitali) still in the same place as he was then.

 

HELL NOPE! WALDO-GAYE winner MUST fight teh WBC Champ Vitali [after he has broken lighthvy Adamek] to make a new World Champeen Lineage. BUT teh thing is both WALDO And GAYE would get KO'd by Big VitKlit or lose a wide ass decision. **** teh overrated Ring Magazine for giving WALDO their overrated belt for beating on a chubby man dying of frigging AIDS. :rofl:rofl:rofl



Foreman Hooooooooooooooooook!:smoke

 

end the thread

this sums it up

 

/thread

I agree 100% with them 2 posted messages i quoted. :deal

 

they will be unified champion and prob ranked no 1,but will not be undisputed champion.

certantly if haye wins he needs to fight vitali to shut up any naysayers who doubt he could win vs the tougher chinned and tougher willed brother.

if wlad wins then there can be no undisputed champion,both bros will hold the belts,and will never fight each other and never unify all belts.

 

Hell Yes!

 

Linear (or lineal) champ usually means the man who beat the man...


And since Rocky retired undefeated, the line ended there.

But if we consider Floyd Patterson as the champ after that (and few would dispute that), then the linear championship flowed through Liston, Clay/Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Ali, Spinks, Ali, It had another break at that point.

A small case could be made for Holmes as he beat (A greatly diminished ) Ali. Weak case, but for the sake of linearity, Holmes beat the last linear champ in 1980.

It then flows through Holmes, Spinks, Tyson, Douglas, Holyfield, Bowe, Holyfield, Moorer, Foreman, Briggs, Lewis, Rahman, Lewis.

When Lewis retired, there was another break.

And since Lewis stayed retired, there is no current linear champion at HW.

Vitali, as WBC sanctioned successor to Lewis (by defeating Sanders) has a case as being the "restart' linear champion.

And as he has remained undefeated since, he has as good a claim as any to title of linear champion.

He was not in the same boat as Patterson after Marciano, given the profliferation of belts since that time, but he has as more claim under 'the man-who-beat-the-man' logic, than anyone else.


To truly restart the linear titles, someone would need to hold at least the WBA and WBC titles.

And to be undisputed champion, one would need all four belts.

 

Only if they truly fight.

 

Since tommy burns lineage has ALWAYS been created by a fight between 1 v 2. Sharkey v schmelling, patterson v moore. For vitali to create he'd have had to fight byrd instead of danny williams. Likewise wlad would have had to have beaten rahman/maskaev/peter. Hence there has been no champ since lewis.

The belts are really just there to generate money for certain individuals.