Most one-sided loss a #1 contender received from the champion?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by ChrisPontius, Aug 14, 2008.


  1. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,674
    27,388
    Feb 15, 2006
    Fair has got nothing to do with it.

    Spinks might have been a poor champion but he was the champion untill sombody beat him.
     
  2. dmille

    dmille We knew, about Tszyu, before you. Full Member

    2,269
    69
    Aug 1, 2004

    I don't consider someone [Tyson] who refuses to fight any top 10 opponent and got the title gifted to him, the champion. Especially not if there's someone else [Lewis] who is destroying every opponent the champion SHOULD be fighting out there, and has collected the belt that the "champion" dropped to avoid a hard fight.
     
  3. ChrisPontius

    ChrisPontius March 8th, 1971 Full Member

    19,404
    278
    Oct 4, 2005
    And when did i claim Tyson was THE champion in 1996?


    Like i said, a true, but irrelevant point.
     
  4. ChrisPontius

    ChrisPontius March 8th, 1971 Full Member

    19,404
    278
    Oct 4, 2005
    Yeah well i don't buy that. You can win the title and fight bums or just be plain inactive and still be considered champion. Tunney is still reigning if he were alive i guess. That's one good thing the alphabet titles introduced: you can no longer sit on the title for several years and still be considered champion.
     
  5. bizzer07

    bizzer07 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,246
    1
    Dec 11, 2007
  6. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,674
    27,388
    Feb 15, 2006
    The lineal title can only be lost through defeat in the ring or retirment.

    I am not saying it should be so I am just saying that it is so.

    If you disagree then you are going to have to drasticaly rewrite the heavyweight lineage.

    Corbett, Fitzsimmons, Willard, Dempsey, all sat on the title.

    Are you going to strip them retrospectivley?
     
  7. jowcol

    jowcol Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,333
    841
    Jul 22, 2004
    Foster-Rondon came to my mind immediately.
    Tho Rondon was the "WBC chump-er...champ" Foster hadn't
    lost his title since dismantling Tiger in 68. This may have been
    the first stripping of a major title that had ever been done, save
    the WBA 1965 Terrell joke. This scrap was brutal payback,
    plain and simple...
     
  8. Muchmoore

    Muchmoore Guest

    :good
     
  9. Muchmoore

    Muchmoore Guest

    So dropping the only belt you have in order to fight much inferior opposition, while another guy comes along unifying all 3 titles in the ring means you're still THE world champion?

    No.
     
  10. Sam Dixon

    Sam Dixon Member Full Member

    458
    12
    Nov 20, 2004
    Spinks didn't drop the IBF title, but rather it was stripped off him in Feb of '87 due more to Cooney's refusal rather than what Spinks was refusing to do.

    However legitimate one views the Spinks/Cooney fight as being, that was a fight that was in the works for over a year before it actually happened, and when Spinks (and Lewis) negotiated his deal to take part in the HBO unification tournament, he specifically asked for and was granted the right to have one fight that wasn't to be a part of the tournament, which would have been the Cooney fight. Those in charge later (after the fact when Spinks signed his deal) added in a stipulation stating that if Spinks was to defend outside of the tournament, then the fighters involved in that fight (Spinks & Cooney, who had already signed) must agree to continue on in the tournament if they happen to win the fight. Spinks agreed to, as per his earlier deal. Cooney and his team refused to do so in advanced if they won the fight against Spinks, and that was the kicker that started the political ball rolling, which ended with Spinks being stripped by the IBF.

    As per his original and agreed to contract with those putting on the tournament, Spinks had every right to pursue and go through with the fight with Cooney, which also earned him a boatload of money more than he would have versus Tucker.

    The IBF wasn't the only belt Spinks held at the time, though, as he also held that ugly and transparent "People's Championship" belt that was given to him. Ok, nevermind about that belt, but Spinks did hold the Ring Magazine championship title (in addition to his linear title, if different), and also was presented a belt by The Ring signifying such in the buildup to Tyson/Spinks at a prefight press conference.
     
  11. ironchamp

    ironchamp Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,365
    1,034
    Sep 5, 2004
    If I could I would....unless they continued to pay the sanctioning fees....

    I guess the Alpha titles did bring about one good thing. It forced fighters to fight regularly. which I think is good.


    Trouble is the alpha titles sometimes give 3rd tier fighters title shots.
     
  12. hitman_hatton1

    hitman_hatton1 Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,733
    4
    Jul 19, 2004
    good post.

    never knew that.

    shame spinks blotted the copybook with the tungstad fight.

    but nevermind. :yep
     
  13. stevebhoy87

    stevebhoy87 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,304
    5
    Dec 7, 2007
    the ones that spring to mind for me

    Sanchez v gomez
    Whitaker v ramirez 2
    Maywether v corrales
    calzaghe v lacy
     
  14. Gambino

    Gambino Member Full Member

    482
    1
    Jul 3, 2008
  15. the cobra

    the cobra Awesomeizationism! Full Member

    12,028
    106
    Jun 30, 2008
    Hopkins-Trinidad
    Louis-Schmelling II
    Liston-Patterson II
    Mayweather-Coralles
    Whitaker-Ramirez II


    Duran-Dejesus III was a one-sided fight.

    If thes guys were his top contenders, Ali-Williams, Ali-Folley, and Ali-Terrell.

    Norton had beaten Ali, so he may have been Foreman's #1 contender when Big George ran over him in two rounds.

    Again, I'm not sure if he was the #1 contender, but Dick Tiger punished Rubin Carter quite badly.