Haye was never undisputed champ at cruiser

Undisputed champion is followed by lineage not by corrupt organizations stupid decisions to strip champions their belts to force meaningless bull**** mandatory’s.

Haye had lineage of all four belts. In my book that makes him undisputed cruiserweight champion.

 

In your book that is.......fair enough:good

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undisputed_Champion


In professional boxing, the undisputed champion of a weight class is a boxer who is recognized as the world champion at that class by all the major sanctioning bodies.


...and that's all there is to it.

 

http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-definitions/undisputed world champion

http://www.123exp-sports.com/t/01981174174/

Follow the links and you'll see the meaning of undisputed champion in boxing dictionary....Just to balance things out, if there are opinions, there are facts...peace!!!

 

Yes, it was obvious from the very beginning that Haye was not undisputed cruiserweight champion. However, the thing that has been bothering me is that Haye did not fight some very good fellow cruiserweights after beating dowhill Mormeck. He decided to take a domestic fight with Macca instead of fighting the best. In fact Haye has fought only one big name in Mormeck. No one else from his resume is worth mentioning. Maybe Macca...

 

I think you are wrong to treat the term 'undisputed champion' like it isn't subjective and that there is some strict definition to be adhered to.

You keep preaching how there is this strict definition of having to currently hold or win all the belts. In that case, on what specific date did this definition change to include the IBF? There wasn't a specific date and do you know why? It's because the meaning of an 'undisputed champion' can evolve and exactly how that happens isn't down to a what is written in a history book, it's down to the fans of the sport.

Now if you want to give more credance to corrupt sanctioning bodies that will strip a champion at the drop of a hat then that's your choice. Personally I would rather use my own common sense to decide if a champion can be considered undisputed. Given the current nature of multiple world titles and sanctioning bodies that are always ready strip the title from a guy who doesn't lose his belt in the ring. If your definition doesn't evolve when will we ever see another undisputed champion?

 

i consider him undisputed because Bell was IBF champ, then Mormeck beat him and then Haye beat Mormeck. The IBF title was stripped but actually its not like Bell lost the IBF championship in the ring. Its almost like saying Calzaghe was never undisputed at SMW because he never beat Lucian Bute. Calzaghe had the WBO and IBF but he was stripped of the IBF just before he won the last 2 belts. By that time Bute had already won the vacant title. I still considered Calzaghe undisputed.

actually i will backtrack on that. Once Cunningham knocked out Marco Huck it was clear that Haye had to beat him to become undisputed. However just holding the IBF title doesn't cut it.

Haye was the linear champ and the best fighter in the division but never undisputed since Cunningham did have a claim as some of his fans were backing after he beat Huck.

 

It is diiferent because Calzaghe beat Lacy and Kessler. On the other hand Haye never bothered to fight other good cruiserweights.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

You messed with the worng fans though...This thread will never be closed...lol