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

It's cool you have your opinion man but you have to accept that you're in the minority, you need to accept that wlad is widely regarded as an ATG by pretty much everyone. You can shout that he's not as loud as you like but it's not gonna change anyone else's opinion.

 

Ali officially retired June 1979..please post an article where he announces his comeback on July 1979. It didn't happen, pull your head out of your ass. He came back several months later, not one month later. He was retired well into 1980. Over half a year.

WHO rated comeback Ali and Holmes as #1 and #2? Find a source Egyptian, you won't. Maybe your precious RING magazine?

 

Provide links, prove you are not talking out of your ass.

Weaver should have been rated higher than Ali, he beat Tate.

And while Holmes wasted his time in a worthless fight with a sick retiree, Weaver knocked out Coetzee.

Holmes never rematched Weaver..or fought his leading contender Dokes.

 

In the beginning of 2006, Ring Magazine had these rankings for the heavyweight division....

1. Byrd
2. Rahman
3. Toney
4. Brewster
5. Ruiz
6. Barrett
7. Brock
8. Klitschko
9. Peter
10. Valuev

Now.... take a long look at that list. Wlad had just beat Peter, dropping him to where he stood. Wlad actually already beat, or soon beat 6 of the 9 boxers on that list who aren't named Wladimir Klitschko. He did all of this within the following 2 years of this publication. How on earth do you think he wouldn't be the mythological "true champ" after doing that? Especially when 3 of those boxers that he beat were ranked #1, #2, and #4.... with #3 beating beat by Peter.... who Wlad already beat. After which, Wlad again beat Peter. Wlad also continued to knock off all of the top ranked contenders to himself throughout his entire title reign. To argue Wlad's legitimacy as Champ at this point is just absurd.

 

Once the WBC belt is vacated... it means nothing. The WBC has meant next to nothing ever since Vitali's first retirement. Explain... what is the difference between the WBC, IBF, and WBA? Lewis held them all, and vacated them all to avoid his #1 mandatory challenger at one point another.... whether it was Byrd, Ruiz, or a rematch with Vitali. Either way, they were all belts vacated by the former Champ that he didn't lose in the ring. So, after he retires, it's left up to the top contenders left in the world to battle it out and see who's the best. If you don't think that Wlad proved that in very short order.... then you are probably following the wrong sport.

The "lineal" title (the actual belt being held by the Champ) should only change hands when the person holding it actually loses to another opponent. If that person retires without losing, why would one of his former title belts hold some sort of magical power? Obviously, it is then up to all of the contenders to fight and prove who belongs at the top, regardless of what overvalued/scandalous/fraudulent/enslaving "belt", if any, that they hold or are fighting for. Wlad proved that he was the best by beating all of the other top fighters in the world... it's pretty simple.

 

How can we hold a modern fighter to the standards of a completely different era? Old timers had ONE belt to go after. Modern fighters have a half dozen. And have to navigate treacherous boxing politics. Imagine how long it would have taken Joe Louis to unify that many? Back then, someone would probably draw the color line (or used a different excuse) and he never would have unified. Wlad was regarded as the best, highest profile champ when he first beat Byrd in 06. His brother coming complicated things, but as far as I'm concerned he had 18 legit successful consecutive defenses, and any "asterisk" should also be made for Holmes, who never unified at all.

 

I don't see how that is even relevant?

 

:good

 

The situation of today is completely different from the days of Louis and Holmes. Today they give out belts like candy and it's nearly impossible to get all the belts or get the lineal title because it's being held hostage. TV networks also play a big role today which wasn't the case in the olden days.

 

I understand your confusion. No biggie.

Lineage isn't determined by a #8 contender vs #1.

Its either by beating the man or #1 vs #2.

IBF belt does not equal the HW Championship.

I hope that cleared things up for you.

 

Get your facts straight ,cisco has an iq of 69 !!

 

How about beating #1 and #2? Also, how about a couple years later when Wlad had beat everyone in the top 5 outside of his own brother, who was in and out of the sport himself. None of that matters? I guess it's still a bit murky to me... I apologize. Here I thought that the real boxing fans could figure out and decide who's the best in the world. I guess we need specified ring rankings (because they are also spot on, of course), and magical alphabet org titles to tell us.