Who Is The Oldest Legitimate No.1 Fighter in His Division in History?

Never heard of him. Any fights you can recommend.

And that is ancient.

 

He was a Venezuelan, he didn't turn pro till late but won a world title soon after the lightflyweight division was invented. He won the title against a debutant but then racked up about a dozen title defences. I just remember him because he was one of the first champs I remember. I've never seen him in action but I was familiar with Franco Udella when he fought him. I also remember he was a grandfather when he was world champ. The Venezuelan government or board retired him.

 

Very interesting. One of those you learn something new every day type things.

 

I thought he deserved the decision in both bouts, but they were close. Dawson was a horrible match up for 'this' Hopkins.

 

Moore was still there about in early '62. Harold Johnson might have beaten him or Doug Jones but it no sure thing. He beat Rinaldi in '61 and his fights with Rademacher, Lavourante and Pastrano while not at light heavyweight showed he could still box.

 

Rinaldi was Garbage though and the only reason he defended against him (and Rinaldi was rated) was because he lost to him in Italy (Fleisher never missed an opportunity to rate undeserving foreign fighters that might help create interest for his magazine abroad). When he lost to Rinaldi Rinaldi had faced nobody. As you said that fight was in 1961 anyway. He never fought another LHW and the closest he came was Pastrano which was considered a controversial decision at the time.

 

Vitali Klitschko was 41 when he retired as WBC champ. He was arguably the #1 heavyweight in the world at the time. Or at least 1b. (Wlad being 1a.)

Vitali has always said he could beat Wlad. Wlad has always agreed with him.

 

No, he was unequivocally the #2.

This content is protected

 

What about Joe Brown at lightweight at up to about 35?

 

What about Britton after the Leonard win? Was he a clear #1 and is he the oldest ever at WW?

 

I understand why you say that, but the fact that the two never fought makes nothing absolute.

Vitali was named the RING champ (the lineal champ) when he beat Corrie Sanders. Vitali retired without losing. Then he came back from retirement three years later and beat the guy who held the title he vacated - Sam Peter.

A year after Vitali returned, RING named Wlad their champ (the lineal champ) based on a win over Chagaev, who was rated below Vitali in the RING's own ratings.

I can't think of another time when RING named a guy a Lineal champ, that guy retired due to injury, and then that Lineal champ returned, and RING turned around and named someone else Lineal champ" ... even though their previous "lineal" champ was already back and had already regained a title and ... never lost another fight again.

Even in the case with Ali and Frazier ... Frazier was named the new Lineal champ after beating Ellis. At that point, Ali didn't even have a license to fight yet, he'd lost all his court cases, and he was still looking at five years in prison.

If Ali had returned before Frazier and Ellis, and Ali never lost another fight the rest of his career ... nobody would've recognized the Frazier-Ellis winner as Lineal champ.

In Vitali's case, he was the Lineal champ, he returned, regained the WBC title he had, and RING waited a year and then named Wlad the LINEAL champ.

There's an argument that says Vitali was the #1 guy. That, plus that fact that the brothers themselves agree Vitali was the better of the two.

 

You could say that. But remember that the Corrie Sanders fight was between number 1 and 3, same as the Chagaev and Wlad one.

And Marvin Hart and Tommy Burns were unquestionably lineal champs, something which would not be true if Jim Jeffries only relinquished the title to Jack Johnson in 1910.

Vitali voluntarily retired, and even ran for mayor of Kiev, and lost. You don't keep your championship status while you are retired voluntarily. If you came back, you have to fight the current champ or number one to regain your place.

Otherwise, Lennox Lewis could come back today, fight some bums and avoid the best, and would still be considered the number one and lineal champ based on that reasoning. If he lost to Alexander Dimitrenko tomorrow, does that mean Dimitrenko is the true champion?

Or Rocky Marciano could come back in 1965 and fight bums and would he be considered the champ or number one instead of Ali? If Ali fought him and won, would that mean Liston and Patterson were never lineal champs and the best? Or Tunney in 1935 instead of Braddock?

Or Manny Pacquiao could come back to 140 and be automatically be considered the best and lineal above Danny Garcia just because he beat Hatton in 2009 and was never defeated at that weight?

 

Sorry, double post.

 

You're overlooking a major point.

While Lewis, Ali, Marciano and Jeffries were retired, new Lineal champs were named.

That wasn't the case with Vitali. No one was named Lineal champ while he was gone.

When he returned, and reclaimed the title he'd vacated in his very first fight back, he should've remained the Lineal champ. After all, none had been named while he was gone.

And not only did Ring not recognize his lineal claim when he returned, they waited a whole year, and even after Vitali successfully defended the title, Ring named the winner of Wlad-Chagaev the Lineal champ.

And then Vitali fought for years after that, defending his title, and he never lost.

Ring obviously screwed up. Naming a "new" Lineal champ when the last Lineal champ they named was active, had a world title and was making defenses ... made no sense at all.

But Vitali Klitschko fought 11 times, in 11 title fights AFTER being named LINEAL champ by Ring, and he never lost a single fight. Hell, he barely lost a round.

You could make a reasonable claim that he was #1 when he retired.

 

You are right. He was number one when he retired in 2004. But Wlad was unquestionably number one in 2012 when Vitali retired the second time. Why?

The reason why he wasn't named lineal champ when none was named while he was away was that he was retired four years. He made a voluntary retirement, announced it even, ran for mayor of Kiev, therefore forfeited all claims at being champion.

You do not automatically regain your championship just because you unretired after four years. You have to prove that you are once again the number one.

And during those four years, Wlad unquestionably became number one. And he proved it by defeating the best during Vitali's absence.

Vitali needed to fight Wlad to regain his place. Otherwise, it would be unfair to those who did all the hard work while he was retired.

Every reputable publication, Ring, ESPN, etc, kept Wlad number one when Vitali defeated Sam Peter in 2008. There was a reason for this.

And the reason for this is what happened between 2005 and 2008.