Linial HW Title question

IBO is a polystrene belt, as are those others you listed.

I was unhappy enough when people started recognising the WBO as non-paper, since 3 important alphabet titles (WBC, WBA, IBF) was already more than enough...

 

Whilst being ranked number 1, Wlad has never fought the 2nd ranked contender. That was first Maskaev, then Peter, now vitali. his resume overall is fantastic, but he never beat lewis nor number 1/2 whilst ranked 1/2.

The only way we'll see a lineal champ is if Haye beats either brother.

Wlad has been the best heavyweight in the world since 06, so I see what you mean by kinda lineal. I'd say this has been his era, but he never really made a legit claim to the title.

 

The IBO is just as important as the WBA, WBC, IBF and WBO.

If you tread in dog **** it still stinks, whether it came from a Doberman or a Yorkshire Terrier...

 

Are you going by Ring Rankings here? I don't entirely rate them. Wlad beat the lineage holders of the WBA (discounting Jones/Toney), IBF and WBO, his scalp of Peter went on to win the WBC and beat Toney when he was champion, that elevates his claim as it did for Charles when Louis beat Savold

 

Hell no. :nono

Are you a big Wlad-Fan?

 

Oh god no, the bloke seems sacred of his own shadow, he has so little self confidence and trust in his chin.

But the IBO is just as important as is any other three letters you can put together and create a boxing organization with.

 

So do you value them all equally?

Would you say Fossil Holyfield is as much a champion as Vitali & Haye?

 

Yes.

Anyone can be a champion, you just need to create a title to hold. It does not mean much.

(Everybody needs to do the same, it is the only way to get rid of the problem of multiple titles.

If you starting claiming that one is better/more important than another, you just boost the ego's of Messrs Mendoza, Suleiman, etc, and make them feel they are legitimate.)

Now a days I consider the brothers and Haye as better fighters than Holyfield, but that does not stop Holyfield claiming a title.

THE Championship is held by no one since Lennox Lewis, as no one, Holyfield, Haye, Vlad, Vitali, no one has met the criteria to win the vacant championship.

One possible way to help get out of this situation is for Lewis to anoint a fight as being for the vacant championship. It has kind of been done in the past, and would add credence to the victor in such fight.

 

I strongly agree that we need just one World Championship per division, especially to save the Heavyweight division. It would be great if Lewis could anoint the winner of Haye-Wlad as the World Champ, & all the other "world" titles are declared void. I would actually support that.

 

Vitali shown that he can beat Lewis, rematch was in the works and Lewis retired while facing mandatory defense against Vitali. That means Vitali had a valid claim at the title. Ruiz was out of the picture with his loss to Jones. That left Byrd and Sanders. Vitali (as you mentioned) should have won Byrd fight but even so Byrd lost to Wlad, Sanders beat Wlad, Vitali beat Sanders so Vitali had a pretty solid claim at lineage at the time.

 

it's good to be back on here...

I think janitor's initial post pretty much nailed it but i like this one as well. still, lewis retiring has no bearing on vitali being considered lineal, only beating sanders AFTER lewis retired promoted him. just cause the champ retires doesn't mean the number 1 contender is given the crown

after vitali retired, his claim was over and has been filled by wlad. the true, lineal title has been dead for over a century since jeffries retired. then died when tunney retired...and when marciano retired...

essentially every couple of decades a new lineage is created and now, it's held by wlad

 

Actualy, quite a few people seem to have questioned Hart's claim. The atitude was verry much "lets see what Hart does next and maybee". I get the idea that Tommy Burns rescued Hart's claim retrospectivley by his level of activity. By the time Burns faced Johnson, his claim seems to have been prety universaly acepted.

In Schmelings case, many people disputed his claim due to the circumstances under which he won the title. His claim seems to have gained general aceptance after he defeated Young Stribling, who was then the #1 or 2 contender.

The take home message from this, is that what you do after you win your claim, can be more important than how well the claim is initialy perceived. If Vitally Klitschko had followed up his win over Corrie Sanders with a win over Hasim Ramhan or Lamon Brewster, then it might have taken root.

Wladamir's claim might yet take root. I personaly hope that it does.

 

I would agree the with hindsight claim can work.

But the Klitschkos (although, seemingly, two perfectly nice fellas) have screwed it up. I suspect, the only 'with hindsight' you are going to get is (if sadly) Lennox comes back, then we can re-write seven plus years of lost history...

 

i respectfully disagree, at least in wlad's case. his longevity and consistent domination will look good, on paper and video, in years to come and should solidify his already decent claim

 

I agree.

People might almost be looking for ways to validate his claim.