Can Sullivan,Corbett,Fitz,Jeffries,& Hart Truly Be Called "World" Champions?

Thank you for your eloquent and well considered response!

 

I think we can call them World Champions, but their rating should take a hit for them not fighting the best available opponent(s), regardless of the reasoning.

A modern day equivalent of the same 'principle', is Wlad Klitschko's rating, which is tempered by the fact he refused to fight a key, number-1 contender (that being his brother Vitali). Despite this, however, we still consider Wlad a World Champion; just rated with those circumstances in mind.

 

I feel it is self-evident that if you exclude a portion of the world's boxers as opponents, you cannot then be truly considered the world champion.

 

Most of the time it really wasn't the fighters themselves who drew the color line, it was their management, that was forced to comply with the public, that was usually forced to comply with government, and the Nation of that time. Fighters are competitive by nature, and want the toughest challenges, especially that era before mass media , it was actual love of combat that inspired most fighters of the time. (imagine all the back alley on the docks fighters back in those days that were just as good as some of the mainstream fighters , but are unheralded unless they were seen in person) It was the love of fighting and not the business love of fighting that inspired those fighters.

 

Though, is it not the case that a portion (indeed, a large majority) of the world's boxers are excluded from challenging for the world title, on the basis of their perceived level/abilities?

 

This is different. A whole blanket ban on a group of people regardless of their ability is not they same as people not reaching the required level. I do acknowledge that ducking specific fighters who deserve a shot could weaken a claim to be the world champion but again that is for a different debate. Put simply if AJ stated that he would not fight Americans or Wilder refused to defend against white fighters, then I for one can't see how they could maintain a claim to be the "World" champion, regardless of the fact that they might be the best in the world.

 

Fair point.

So, it is the act of declaring an exclusion itself, which damages ones claim to the title of 'World Champion'; even if it is unknown, as to whether or not there are any worthy challengers within the excluded group.

Makes one wonder how people would view the situation, had the 'Champions' in question pursued the same policy of exclusion, without having announced it publicly.

 

Exactly! Tunney and maybe Dempsey might qualify under your second point.

 

Were Ali and Foreman real world champs even though no Soviet or Cuban boxers were turning pro?

Has any professional "champion" in any weight division ever gone on a "world" tour and fought the best boxer on each continent on earth?

No.

Someone has always gotten left out.

 

I don't think that many champions literally did this.

My impression standing back from the events, is that the color line was used as a device to eliminate one or two dangerous challengers.

Most of the champions who drew the color line took an inconsistent position on it.

Many of them did not believe in it before they held the title, after they held the title, and ins some cases for much of the time when they held the title.

Jeffries was probably the only champion who believed in it down to his bones, and drew it against strong and weak challengers alike.

 

Wasn't Corbett meant to have been the biggest racist of the bunch?

 

McVey can cast his forked tongue at Jeffries as well many other accomplished white heavyweights before 1960, but would not dare start a color line thread on his boy Dempsey, nor would he start a thread about who Jack Johnson avoided as champion.

He's full of double standards. Monroe could be viewed as top ten in 1904. He was big man ( 215 for Jeffries ), who have never been stopped.

At any rate, Jeffries did seeming that no other heavyweight champion has done in the past. After winning the title, he quickly defended it again the #1 and #2 man out there ( Sharkey and Corbett ) then gave Fitz, who was still deadly and knocking contenders flat a second chance.

Has another champion in the history of boxing selected their top two ranked opponents for their 1st and 2d title defense, then gave a re-match to the man who he won the title from?