He didnt have the WBO belt. So just 3 major belts plus the IBO. That situation has occurred more times since then I believe. Like now. Usyk has every belt but the WBC. So we could already call him undisputed as well like Lennox was back in the day.
The WBO was not considered a major belt until January 2007, when the IBF began recognising the WBO champions separately on its rating list. At this point the WBO was recognised by all 3 of the other major bodies. Before this point, holding all 3 of the WBC, WBA and IBF was considered undisputed.
Wlad was the WBO champ back then. I guess thats why they didnt want to make the fight. I will call Usyk undisputed for now. 4 major belts has never happened before. Usyk or Fury will be the first in history if the fight gets made.
The WBO champion at the time was Shannon Briggs. Feel free to call Usyk undisputed, but in reality his claim as champion is disputed by the existence of Tyson Fury, who hasn’t lost since beating Klitschko, is considered lineal by many, and holds one of the 4 major belts. Until they meet, neither man can claim to be undisputed in my view.
Here you go: [url]https://boxrec.com/en/title/91/Heavyweight[/url] If You dont call Usyk undisputed now i wont call Lewis undisputed then.
I’m unsure what your link is meant to show, other than confirming what I said, that in January 2007 Shannon Briggs was the WBO champion. The term undisputed has a generally accepted meaning, which is to hold all the belts of the major sanctioning bodies. Many would be stricter and insist on the lineal title as well, which is why some don’t see Tyson as undisputed despite holding all 3 belts until he beat Michael Spinks. Before January 2007, this means holding the WBC, WBA and IBF belts. Lewis did this, and held the lineal title, so was undisputed. After January 2007, this means holding the WBC, WBA, IBF and WBO belts. Usyk hasn’t done this, and doesn’t have the lineal title, so is not undisputed.
The WBO was not officially recognized during his reign this is just boxing history. Lewis beat multiple contenders who held the WBO
In years on this forum I don't think I've ever seen a post quite so childish as this, and I wish I was joking
If you were around then, no one gave two squirts of **** that Lewis didn't hold the WBO. Wladimir was holding what was largely viewed as a glorified Euro trinket and he was seen as an interesting challenger to Lewis, but squandered his chances by losing to Sanders and Brewster, which is why big brother Vitali ultimately got the call.
The WBO wasn’t a major title back then, it was viewed the same as the IBO is now. This is as stupid as saying that Naoya Inoue isn’t undisputed because Liam Davies holds the IBO belt.
So, the last undisputed champion was Mike Tyson then? And Wlad didn't hold the WBO belt when Lennox was undisputed. Vitali did. Practically speakin' the last undisputed champion was Wlad between 2013-2014.