>>> Get your facts straight, Wlad only has *3* title defenses...

Holmes record was built on "title defenses" in general, no specific title as he held several at various points and was never lineal to the standard as being held to Wlad.


Ali languished his lineal claim when he retired. The win over him meant nothing.

 

That is just Oscar's opinion. He also dresses like a woman, I hear.

They also gave Wlad the lineal title after he beat Chageav. So...which is it? Are you a RING boy, dino?

 

Apparently RING magazine, who gave Wlad their lineal title after Chageav...so

 

He tried, came back from vicious Knockout loses, with the guidance of Emanuel Steward evolved into Wlad 2.0 & Wlad 3.0

His title defenses were a great feat the best part of his career, came short from breaking Joe Louis record. You can't deny the fact that he pinned down the division for a decade :smoke

 

Hoya had nothing to do with the Ring Ranking in 2008.

 

I thought he got the lineal after beating Charles. Either way his quality of opposition is up there with Louis and Holmes.

 

Think he at least partly owned it by that time. Still Wladimir was a legit champion.

 

He has since 2007.

[url]http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/columns/story?columnist=rafael_dan&id=3019164[/url]

 

who are you talking about?

 

Because the Duck is a troll that should be ignored. He also betted his account Wlad would never fight Povetkin, than Pulev, than Fury, and he's still here.

Lineal title is certainly theoretical especially in regards to creating a new Champion. The #1 and #2 rule is rooted purely in opinion, because who is the #1 and #2? You have people citing the RING ratings for that...yet, they won't recognize the RING's Champion. Too many holes in that logic, most hater logic is hole ridden.

It boils down to opinion like any other.

 

It's not theoretical, it exists :yep
Stevenson is lineal not Wlad or Fury.

[url]http://www.boxingforum24.com/showpost.php?p=16994473&postcount=11[/url]

 

Wlad was lineal when he beat Povetkin.

You could argue Vitali was lineal from beating Sanders up until his second retirement. When Vitali retired first time there was no contest to fill his throne so once he returned who has a better championship claim than he? No one imo.

Wlad was the best HW since beating Byrd, but only by virtue of not facing Vitali.

I don't judge greatness on how long someone is champion but to compare era and history you need consistency.

Now whilst 1v3 did often fill lineal championships back in the day, there was only one belt so it was very easy to call a man a world champion. Since the proliferation of the belts we have to be stricter in our criteria.

Unlike Naysayer I don't use lineage as a measure of greatness, I just use it as a tool to trace back championship history.

 

I have posted this on another thread previously.

It is far too easy to be a titlist these days but far too hard to start a lineage.

A fair comparison therefore is when the boxer becomes number #1 titlist which Wlad became when he beat Byrd 2. He then made 18 defences of his title. His 5 WBO defences are pointless though.

 

I agree with this. Wlad wasn't lineal but he defended his position as the number 1 HW.