you talk about dominating the weight class, that just means you're a dominant champion. undisputed means that youre claim to being champ is legitimate. that is no one can question pavliks claim being champ.
Great performance, I hope he goes on to be a 160 and 168 star. I was surprised that Taylor put up such a good showing. I had favoured Pavlik to win. Pavlik must be ranked high in the P4P chart now for stopping Miranda and now Taylor and being undefeated with a very high KO ratio. He's young, has a strong chin, heart and has the size to go 168 and 175. In answer to the question, Pavlik is THE middleweight champion of the world. WBO,WBC and Ring Magazine champ. There are so many belts now that the "undisputed" titles don't last for long. Sturm and Abraham are German based Alphabet title holders at 160.
thats what i've been saying all along. he is undisputably the champion of the world at that weight class. this confusing **** is just word play
No - I take the word UNDISPUTED quite LITTERAL - unlike you. Hell, according to your definition Lacy might as well have been considered "undisputed" BEFORE fighting Calzaghe - simply down to the fact that a majority thought he'd beat Calzaghe, who in turn most ppl thought would beat everyone else. If anything YOUR definition is more about just being dominant (but way too early to call Pavlik that). In fact - even though i'm a big Kessler fan - i do NOT think Kessler should be considered "undisputed", even if he beats Calzaghe. Sure there'd be a lot stronger case for it, than there is for calling Pavlik undisputed now. But there would still be up and comers like Bute with a realistic (though not good) chance of beating Kessler the next day.
When you have first become undisputed, you can only lose it by either; losing in the ring, shifting weight class or retiring. A threat is not enough, because there will always be threats in some peoples eyes.
ok 1 title : titlist 2 titles: unified titlist 3 titles: unfied champion 4 titles: undisputed champion then you have lineal: which is when you beat the man of the division who had beat the man before him and beat him ect ect. ring belt: more for the best fighter in the division and this can be given to anyone of the above titlist unified titlist ect. i think joel casamayor was still ring champion for almost a hwole year when he lost all his titles. just my way of breaking it down. at the moment i have pavlik as lineal and unified champion thus making him the 'man' of the division
:good this is what i've been trying to get across. i guess it comes down to how we define 'undisputed'. i see it in terms of all the abc straps confusing the hell out of people as to who the champ is, while pavlik brings clarity to the situation by his undisputable claim to being the one true champ. you define it as contenders 'disputing' pavliks claim by challenging him, hence paliks claim being disputed. all word play, but we more or less have the same idea. we cool on that?