Haye was never undisputed champ at cruiser

i think maybe not...let it run...i think its a very important topic..

its amazing that on a boxing forum that there are so many people wrong about this.

 

you couldn't be more wrong...you are so wrong i feel like congratulating you.

congratulations.

 

oh ****...
it the man who beat the man who beat the man who beat his wife, who kicked the dog bull****

 

cant handle the truth?:hey

 

:rofl:rofl

 

you have a crystal ball that told you that.:yep..you dont know for sure

 

The thread needs to end yep, but the Haye fans have a point. As i said the term universally recognized(As of 07) is as important as the term undisputed. The minute the IBF recognized the WBO they assured this, hence the 3 year delay.

The Majority belt holder(3 of 4) is the Universally recognized champ, whatever 3 of the 4 he holds.

Whether someone sitting in their armchair holds the IBF in higher esteem than the WBO is irrelevant after the IBF itself recognizes the WBO.


The minute they recognised 4 major belts, the combination doesnt matter, holding the majority without argument does.

The old its only the WBA,WBC and IBF route ceased to exsist when the IBF recognized the WBO in 2007.

Just like when the old undisputed ceased to exist in 84 when they recognized the IBF. And we had 3 Major belts.

Difference being a 2-1 split gave you an undisputed champ.(Unlike what we have today)There was no matchup invoving the singular belt holder that could equal or surpass the the holder of 2 belts.

Enter the Universally Recognized when it becomes a 4 Belt Organisastion. 4 Belts give's you problems.

There could be an argument if a Fighter 'A' holds 2 and the other 2 are split 'B' has 1 and 'C' has 1. A fight between B and C would unify half a division. It would also be an arguably bigger and more important match-up than anything fighter 'A' has done, Leaving question marks who was the real champion.

A 3-1 split today negates this.

He is refered to as the Universally recognized, as in he is the beyond dispute champ, no possible matchups that the 1 remaining Belt holder can achieve can surpass his work without facing him.

David Haye achieved this.

 

Here is the deal with Haye vs Cunningham. He claimed he cleaned up the Cruiserweight division. Except he forgot one guy and that was Cunningham. This was the guy making noise besides Haye. The problem with that is that everyone knew who Haye was and nobody knew who Cunningham was. So he decided to move up to heavyweight and take bigger paydays. If I was him I probably would do the same. If he would of fought Cunningham it may not pay what he wants. But he shouldn't go around saying he cleaned up the division when there was one guy left. My 2 cents.
I would of loved to see that fight cause USS would of shot a torpedo up his kazzoo!

 

No, but he has come the closest of anybody since the 07 decision.

If it wasnt for HBO demanding he vacate the IBF belt to try and help the build up of the Kessler fight, the Calzaghe-Kessler fight would have been for the Undisputed title, and the the first fight since the IBF recognized the WBO.

Should have been a nice little tag line but HBO wanted Manfredo.:nut

Had to settle for the Universally recognized title and 5 of the 6 aknowledged accolades.

 

He would`ve crushed that useless ****,Cunningham looked **** against this Huck dude,never fought a top cruiser att and who would`ve seen the fight anyway?.So what if Haye wasn`t an all belt world cruiserweight, Pacquiao never won all belts at all his weights.

 

According to some of the points being made, Chris Byrd and Roy Jones had as much claim to being called the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world as Lennox Lewis did as of May 2003 simply because they won belts that Lennox had vacated.

Yet NOBODY IN THEIR RIGHT MIND dared to consider either of those two fighters the real champ. Why is there a double standard with David Haye because Steve Cunningham won a title belt that was born out of O'Neil Bell's refusal to fight him? Lennox refused to fight both Byrd and Ruiz but nobody refrained from calling him the man to beat, the true champion of the division. Just say that you don't like David Haye. Don't go around looking for technicalities.

And for those of you criticizing the length of David Haye's title reign...well I don't remember Evander making any defenses after becoming undisputed champ either. Both he and Haye knew they were going to heavyweight so why delay the process?

 

this isnt about not liking david haye....it's about the correct meaning of the term 'undisputed'...

next thing you'll be saying that a boxing ring isnt a ring at all...it's square.

 

Good Point:good

 

straws: you are clutching at them.

 

Seriously, all these Haye fans just want to twist definitions to help their fighter. It's stupid.

That stupid ass list on wikipedia someone posted, remember that is edited by fans, it can be biased.. the only ones that fit the stupid Haye definition some are arguing here are Haye, Calazaghe, Juan Diaz, and Nate Campbell.. oh and Ricardo Lopez.

Nobody would argue that Juan Diaz or Nate were undisputed would they? They had the same titles as Mr. Haye.

Ricardo Lopez also was never undisputed, he never won the IBF at straw.

So, Haye fans.. argue that Juan, Nate, or Ricardo were undisputed.

...or are you just in this for Haye?