All-time middleweight defenses

You don't understand the overall point.

Remove all the belts, and just focus on the word champion.

Hopkins, after beating Hoya has every single belt and is the champion.

Everyone else is a challenger. Because that's how it used to be and if we're comparing with the likes of Hagler, Monzon etc we need to be fair.

So Hopkins is the champion, his reign remains unbroken until Canelo vacates his belt.

Golvokin during this time had a WBA belt, but he shouldn't be considered the champion when there's already a champion in the division.

 

CARLOS
MONZON

 

GGG's defences include the 'regular' title, and I think he was elevated to 'super duper' holder after 11 defences or something.

So GGGs defences are NOT comparable to B-Hops IMO, although IIRC there was something about the whole situation that mean it wasn't as cut and dried as it first appears

 

Is that not shifting the goalposts to Undisputed champ defences? For there only to be a THE champ, then they must be undisputed? Otherwise there are always multiple champs - and usually undisputed drop belts as they can't make all the mandos!

Just to be clear on what you are getting at here, what say you on Joe Calzaghe and Sven Ottke?

Both had a record 21 defences (Zags of WBO, Ottke of IBF), both won the belts in the ring - regardless of how much of an utter disgrace it was that they never fought each other, they both have that record.

We can maybe rail against the alphabet soup, but that is the reality and we can't change the goalposts surely?

I know the whole "lies, damned lies and statistics" thing, but the stats are there, and as long as the defences were for one of the 'recognized' governing bodies (3-belt / 4-belt era), then those records are valid.

The governing bodies themselves have made things even murkier by having different 'tiers' of their titles which makes apples v oranges even more of a commonplace occurrence.

Add in Lineal & The Ring into the mix (IIRC a couple of Pacmans 8 division titles are The Ring belt only), and it's hard to keep track of!

 

Alright, so playing that game, Hopkins became undisputed after the Delahoya fight which made him the real champ. After that he made one title defense , thats it. If you call him the real champ after Trinidad, he has only 6 defenses.

 

Champions don't remain champions if they give up the belt out of fear. The lineal belt isn't the only important belt. Hearns won titles in 5 weight divisions, and i dont know if any of them were lineal. Are trying to tell me Hearns was never a champ? Having one champ would make it easier, so one cant take credit from a champ because there are others.If GGG fought Martinez when he came on to the American scene, he would have blasted him out of there then proceeded to do the exact same thing he did, and that is steam roll the entire middleweight division.

 

Exactly the point, Calzaghe and Ottke Bith defending at the same time. Defending what? What's the point?

No comparison can be made there.

 

I agree. For years you have Hopkins, Holmes and Joppy all defending. They can't all be credited, it's nonsense.

I give Hopkins credit only because it was him who unified and not the other two.

 

Hearns was lineal at LMW.

But was he ever once the best WW, MW, SMW or LHW in the world?

What does a defence mean if it is t defending the claim of being the champion?