Recent Welterweight Lineage

hmmmm i've pondered this a lot. and i had previoucly gone with the following version

#1 margo
#2 cotto
#3 mosley

#1vs#3 can determine a champ. and mosley beat margo making him champion.

the problem is, the top 2 didn't rematch. and cotto and mosley where not on an equal par. as cotto had just UD'd mosley.

i think the ruling is the top 2, unless 2 and 3 are considered equal.

i say the belt is currently vacant, with the following situation.

#1 mosley
#2 pac
#3 mayweather

now may and floyd should be seen on an equal parring as they have not fought each other and are both p4p #1 contenders.

which makes the winner of mosley v floyd the champ in my eyes.

however the ring doesnt see mosley as number 1. it sees pac. so pac has to fight the winner of this fight for there to be a ring champ.

we could have another michalowski/jones situation here.

 

well it shouldn't be

as i said cotto was ranked no.1 after floyd retired, margo beat him and then shane beat margo. shane is the man at welterweight.

 

he is the number 1 ranked fighter. but to be THE champ, everyone has to see him as THE champ

 

Pretty much this....... Although lots would hate to acknowledge it. Never mind anyway, in 12 months time we should have a clear answer.

 

ok, no prob

 

How did Cotto re-establish the lineage?

 

It's not impossible. But losing to one guy only proves that you lost to them. When Marquez and Vazquez were involved in their trilogy, they were generally considered one and two at the weight. Just because one lost to the other didn't mean that one of them had to move down.

Lets say Chad Dawson and Bernard Hopkins fought and Hopkins won. Would we then rank Dawson below Glen Johnson? Dawson has two recent wins over Johnson, so that doesn't seem very logical.

 

I would say while Cotto was the top man when Margo beat him, not only is that a suspicious fight, all things considered but being the linear champion and just being the general consensus top dog are different. They are separated by the difference between proof and suspicion. You could have assumed Wladimir Klitschko has been the linear champion since his brother retired by the theory that whoever most think is the best of the division is the linear champion. Meanwhile there are still people who won't call him linear. I think after Ibragimov and Chagaev, he deserves it and is the man now. Cotto was the general consensus number one but he hadn't become the linear champion. It's gone Judah, Baldomir, Mayweather and now it is vacant because of Mayweather's retirement vacation getaway. If we want the linear champion to mean anything as a title, we can't just say whoever we think is the best and/or most established guy is it.

 

If Glen Johnson then beats Hopkins, then possibly!

 

Doesn't bear any relevance to the example?

 

what were Cotto and Margo's rank during the time that they fought. I guess if they were 1 & 2 or 1 & 3 ranked then it means Cotto was the new lineal champ after the fight...

 

when cotto nd margo fought it was no.1 vs no.3 just like calzaghe vs lacy, margo won and then went on to lose to mosley.

 

When Cotto and Margarito fought I think Williams was still in the picture after beating Margarito so Cotto was 1 and Williams 2 or something. That is why Cotto v Margarito wasn't for the Ring belt.

It wasn't even for the Ring belt so it definitely wasn't for the linear title which can only be established by the 1 and 2 fighting each other.

In the Ring rankings now Pacquaio is 1, Mosley 2, Mayweather 3.

The winner is Mosley Mayweather will probably go to 1 with Pacquaio at 2. The point is that a new champ won't be established no matter what until Mosley/Mayweather winner fights Pacquaio assuming he beats Clottey.

 

How does it not?

"Lets say Chad Dawson and Bernard Hopkins fought and Hopkins won. Would we then rank Dawson below Glen Johnson? Dawson has two recent wins over Johnson"

'If Glen Johnson then beats Hopkins, then possibly!'

Maybe i've misread something but i was just answering the question, the only way Johnson would rank higher than Dawson would be by Johnson beating Hopkins after Hopkins beat Dawson, despite Johnson's earlier losses to Dawson.