yes i know..i got your point..there's difference between people's opinion and facts, and i'm with you on this one if you seen my posts....But given haye as your sample have given others a wrong idea..some have even thought that this is haye-hate thread..
You are right. I should not have given Haye as an example. I did not want to discredit Haye by any means as he had remarkable accompishments as a cruiserweight.
You make a fair argument and your point is well taken. However, there is such a date. It occurred when Larry Holmes picked up the IBF title at Heavyweight. The IBF recieved instant recognition.
I completely agree that Holmes picking up the IBF title was an instant source of recognition and regard for the IBF. But it wasn't the case that all of a sudden on the 9th November 1984 it was decided that to be an undisputed champion you have to hold the IBF title as well. It was still a sentiment that evolved over time and became a majority belief as the IBF increased in status.
Very good source, it sums it all up right there. It confirms what I said with the WBO since the beginning, It also confirms that if you vacate a major belt, you are not undisputed anymore. Before posting, please check this website out : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undisputed_Champion first. This is also confirmed by the following 2 websites posted by tolindoy before: http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-definitions/undisputed world champion http://www.123exp-sports.com/t/01981174174/
You bring up a wikipedia link like it's a highly valid source and whatever it states must be true. Well, since you grant so much faith and validity in what wikipedia says... two can play that game: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_undisputed_boxing_champions A list from the same source of undisputed boxing champions and who do they happen to list?? None other than David Haye!