lets have a serious discussion about who is the middleweight champion

The sanctioning bodies follow the weightclasses as constructed. Weight limits are exactly that. Limits. They srent rounded to the nearest. Is that what you mean?

 

Des, I have been doing the Independent World Boxing Rankings since the early 90s. It used to be a private publication on subscription to managers, tv companies, promoters, but in 1998 the IBO bought it on licence so they became the IBO ratings then in 2014 I think the licence ended. We recently became the Premier Boxing Organisation. We list the top 100 in each division with a running track of each fighters last 20 fights showing the quality of opponent they beat. Ratings get updated first day in each month. If your a stats geek you will love it.
www.premierboxingorganisation.com

 

One of the good things about interim championships, Silvers, Youths, intercons etc is that those fights are strictly involve proper weigh-ins at the strict weights. Most fighters have fights outside of the weight class they are ranked, so a number 65 middleweight may fight someone at 165 pounds. I do not put him up to Super-middleweight.

 

I will check it out for sure. I think it is fundamentally different from the way things currently operate.

 

Canelo is.

He might not be the best middleweight, but he is the champion. This is not the first time it has happened and will not be the last.

Hopkins to Taylor to Pavlik to Martinez to Cotto to Canelo.

 

The World Middleweight Champion is Canelo Alvarez.

Then you have guys who hold "paper" titles ... Gennady Golovkin has the most. He's the top contender.

Followed by Andy Lee and Daniel Jacobs, who also have one paper belt each.

Then there's Kid Chocolate, who should beat Jacobs in a few weeks. And you have Billy Joe Saunders, who may beat Andy Lee.

Behind them are Chris Eubank Jr., Matt Korobov and David Lemieux.

If Jermain Taylor returns, he's there on the fringe. So is Austin Trout if he decides to remain above 154.

There are plenty of fighters around to keep everyone busy for a couple years.

I'd rate them:

Champion: Canelo Avarez
1. Gennady Golovkin
2. Kid Chocolate
3. Andy Lee
4. Billy Joe Saunders
5. Daniel Jacobs
6. Chris Eubank Jr.
7. Matt Korobov
8. David Lemiuex
9. Jermain Taylor
10. Austin Trout

I don't include Cotto, because I'm assuming he won't be fighting at middleweight anymore. If he did, drop Trout and put Cotto in the middle somewhere.

 

politically, who cares? realistically, ggg is.

 

Lineal titles are won and lost in the ring.

The only "theoretical" belts are the paper titles.

Orgs "create" paper titles all the time, hand them out to whoever wants to pay a fee ... if there aren't enough belts to go around to all the people paying fees, they make MORE belts so everyone paying fees can have a belt ... and they take them away from those same people as easily as they handed them out ... whether the person wins or loses in the ring.

I think more paper titles are lost "outside" the ring every year than are actually lost in it.

 

so what? the lineal champion can lose to his mandatory, who happens to be the 4th best fighter in his division, so now the lineal title is the 4th most valuable belt in terms of talent. its the man who makes the title, not the other way around.

 

Do you think the world champion at every weight has ALWAYS been the best fighter at that weight?

I've got news for you. Jim Braddock and Buster Douglas weren't the best heavyweights in the world when they were champions. Billy Backus wasn't the best welterweight when he was the champion.

Just like the NY Giants weren't the best team in the NFL when they beat the Patriots the year the Pats were undefeated going into the Super Bowl. But the Giants won the game, so they became the Super Bowl champs.

You win the game, the match, the fight, you win.

 

Although there are obviously some issues with the legitimacy of a lineal title, it is exactly what it it's name says. As you said, it is passed along, usually in legitimate ways, and isn't subject to the whims of a self-serving sanctioning body. At least it is generally settled in the ring.

 

why would i think that, if my entire post was explaining precisely that point, and why the lineal belt does not automatically determine who the best is? did you even read it? canelos belt does not make him the man at 160, any one of ggg's belts is more valuable, because of the man who holds it.

 

Right. Win or lose it in the ring.

It's a pretty sound concept that has always worked better than any decisions made in a board room or in a hotel room after money-filled envelopes have been passed around (Bob Lee).

 

Mike Tyson had won the WBC, WBA, and IBF HW World Title belts before beating "Lineal" HW Champ Michael Spinks.

With that said-

Sure, Canelo is the Lineal MW Champ but Golovkin is the best MW in the world... and he has a couple of belts. If Canelo doesn't want to fight at 160 he should not only be stripped by the WBC but the "Lineal" MW title should be considered vacant due to the fact that he really isn't a MW.

Just fight Golovkin. I would also accept him fighting Mayweather at 154 (no lower). Any other fight is BS, although I wouldn't complain too much over Quillin or Lara.

 

Yes. Don't decide who the champs are by letting them fight in the ring.

Let's create a rating system like Tennis, and at the end of the year we'll just send out a press release announcing who earned the most computer points ... and that person is NUMBER ONE ... YEAH!!!

Go away.

Or better yet, just play a computer game.

I prefer to watch boxers win titles and lose them in the ring.