Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

I think the whole thing stinks to be honest.

The Lewis / Johnson fight wasn't even going to be sanctioned by the WBC, as Johnson was perceived as being a not worthy opponent.

Then all of a sudden he's in a title eliminator, and it boosts Vitlay up the rankings -as does a loss to Lewis??



The Ring (IMO) boosted Vitlay up the rankings because

a) he put up a good fight v Lewis
b) this attracted media and fan interest in him
c) he was probably the best, but who really knows.


IF the ring put Vitlay up the rankings so quickly based on nothing more than gut feel and wishing, then they are no better than the ABC's they hammer about their dodgy rankings.

 

So far as Johnson goes I agree.

But The Ring always gob off about how independent they are of abc's, but they put up Sanders just like the WBC did?

Sounds off to me. Couldn't be because the fight was on HBO by any chance???????

 

He haven't had a World HW Champ since Lewis retired. Just a bunch of titleholders..

 

The Ring has only added to the confusion, as has the inclusion of the WBO. In absence of a true linear champion, the title has to be unified, the new undisputed champion then becomes the new linear title. Undisputed traditionally means unifying the WBC, IBF and WBA titles. The Ring, although they have the best consensus rankings, is still subject to opinion and cannot enforce mandatories.

We have been looking at weightclasses and champions that have been far from undisputed. Mandatories are necessary, though some are below par quality level, to give deserving challengers a shot at the title. The Ring more often than not, has lead to scenario's where the #1 challenger does not get his right to challenge. Some of the (past and present) Ring champions are still idle when it comes to facing their mandatories, imo boxing is too protected.

The Ring does not make you the linear champion or undisputed champion. A unified champion is not the same as the undisputed champion (like I tend to read here nowadays), and to many fighters get hyped without even accomplishing anything. The manner in which Hatton for instance beat Castillo is significant (one of the better fights out there for Hatton at the time), but there is no doubt in my mind that Castillo was being overrated (especially by US fans), which subsequently means that Hatton is now again overrated/ overhated by them.

People who say the alphabet titles mean **** do not know what they are talking about either. The way a fighter comes to notoriety is by earning one of the alphabet belts in the first place, generally before they accomplish that, they are not even known or considered a threat. As long as it serves your agenda certain fighters are allowed to cherry pick their opponents, I think that this is the most harmful part of boxing plus relative inactivity (3 times a year should be a minimum, especially when considering a tune up fight). Give me throwback champions like Lewis, Tszyu and Hopkins - at least they fought the best anytime anywhere...

 

Vitali's claim to fame is giving an old overweight Lewis a tough fight :-(