Can Wlad surpass Homles or maybe even Louis for title defenses?

If anything shattered championship, should equal easier contenders as worthy chalengers are divided by three champs.

 

ohhh **** off.

 

lol wlad has 2 real defenses of the title. he's not undisputed and he just got possession of the lineal title so...

 

If you count the WBO, IBF etc., then it means absolutely nothing anyway. The only defences which would mean something are those of The Ring and lineal titles. So far, Wlad has two defences.

 

yeah

If we count the WBO for instance I think Wlad was ranked 2 or 3 back them, so lets add in all those fights where Joe louis was the 3rd HW in the world as defenses this is only fair

 

i genuinely believe he can do.

i predict wlad to be remembered as atleast a top 10 heavyweight.

the only threat to his dominance is solis IMO

 

those records are never gonna be the same with all the bull**** belts around anymore.....how can you have legit title defenses after beating for example the WBA champ in Chagaev so in teory having WBO, IBF and now WBA titles...then a few months later David Haye is magically the a WBA belt holder....then you have wba regular champ, wba super champ, wbc champion in recess, wbc interim, how the **** can you keep track of whats a legit defense and whats not...boxing and the abcs have ruined any further records and historic value

 

Well, think about it this way...

Lewis was the lineal champion when he retired in 2004, and Vitali was considered the lineal champion following his victory over Sanders. So that eliminates Wlad's first WBO title reign from consideration.

Wlad may have established lineage following his fight with Chagaev...But, since no one was considered the true champion from 2004 until 2009, you could make a case for counting Wlad's IBF title reign. So, if one wanted to go back retroactively to the time when he defeated Byrd and count the title defenses from that point forward that would leave Wlad with nine successful defenses.

And using that as the tally, I don't see Wlad reaching 20-25 title defenses by the time he calls it a career, given his current level of activity. Not impossible...But highly unlikely.

 

At the end of the day, any title defenses he or anybody else made in the period between Lewis beating Holyfield and his retirement shouldn't count at all because he/they were not the champion.
Work out exactly when Wlad became (somewhat) consensus champ and start from there.

 

Wlad will be starched by someone WAAAAAYYYY before he ever get a whif of reaching 12 defenses, much less 20.:-(


You klit huggers are sooo friggin delusional.

 

So you are saying that James Toney was never Champion? James Toney has NEVER held any title other than the IBF title in any weight class.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Sidenote: Larry Holmes also ditched his WBC title for the IBF title, which he finished off his title reign with. So... I guess that doesn't count either.

NONE of the titles by themselves prove who is the real Champ. That is easy for the fans to see. Wlad became the true Champ when he knocked out Chris Byrd. Byrd was the longest standing Champ and was the #1 ranked Heavyweight by ring magazine. Wlad had also just beat the consensus #1 Challenger in the world in order to get that shot at Chris Byrd. From there on, Wlad's title reign began.

Gathering all of the paper titles means nothing. Nobody had to do that back in the day or we wouldn't be looking at boxers in history the same way either. Just because there are 4 world titles, doesn't mean that you have to win them all... especially when they are crooked as ****. Hell, Wlad knocked out the WBA champ and they decided to just give the title back to the previous WBA title holder. Then David Haye beats that guy, and he's a Champ now? Please... that belt means NOTHING.

 

yeh, just like Louis and Holmes right.

Oh, no wait, Wlad's resume doesn't include defenses against boxcar willie and dancing homer.