School me on Dariusz Michalczewski ...

You still don't even understand how the lineage works, you ****ing gimp .

 

Oh brotrha atsch

 

I meant the boxing media and the boxing public but surely they do watch boxing on hbo.

it's one of the major networks in america, why would any fan not watch boxing on there?

anyways by your logic, isn't gonzalez beating dm an indication that gonzalez is the best since he actually beat dm?

as I say lineage, especially since the 80's but on plenty of occassions before that, does not indicate who the best fighter in the world is.

Seriously, look into boxing history and you'll be surprised how many times the lineal claimant has a championship status just on paper.

 

what happened 30 years ago has everything to do with todays boxing when talking lineal titles. Maybe you should research what lineal or lineage means.


Maske or hill should have never been lineal champion thus dm should have never been. It was known that you had to either beat the or become the undisputed champion in order to become the lineal champ. Bottom line its a non-issue, no one cares about it anymore.

 

You noobs are either ****ing dumb, or just ignorant brainwashed Royboys. The whole point of The Ring bringing back their championship, which you tards give so much credibility to, was "intended to reward fighters who, by satisfying rigid criteria, can justify a claim as the true and only world champion in a given weight class.", due to the ridiculous number of fighters claiming to be world champion with their shitty alphabet titles.

The Ring claim their championship policy is that of the Lineal championship, yet immediately fukked everything up completely by handing Jones and Vitali their title without them earning it.

 

It looks like for some people are trying to say he was overrated and does not deserve to be in HOF simply because he was not as brilliant fighter as RJJ.

 

who do you think was the best lhw between 97 and 04

 

This, americans are truly underrating him. Prime Roy Jones Jr. would be the favorite, but we all know what a disgraceful chin he had :deal

But with that said RJJ are truly an ATG and was a gift to the sweet science, but he still didn't beat the man at LWH :good

 

Being undisputed (holding all "mayor" belts) does not mean the same
as being lineal and this is the case here, majority of boxing historians
(EXCEPT hard core Roy fans) consider Hill to BECOME a new lineal
LHW champion when he beat Maske and unified their belts
(two belts was enough at that time).

Deal with it ... you Roy Jones Jr fans are in BIG minority here.

 

undsputed and lineal aren't always the same, but ask yourself what means more.

linearity is an overrated means of tracing back to a man who beat a man.

 

everything may be overrated for making a case ....
linearity is the strongest possibly indication who is the best at the
time when it was won IN TH RING, it requires two top (widely
recognized) fighters in the division to earn it IN TH RING.

After that everything else is just disputable. When Hill beat Maske
they were considered two top LHW and Hill become rightfully a man at LHW.
Then beating a man IN HIS PRIME is still considered for become a
rightful champion and that what DM did, he beat Hill in his next fight.

What was wrong is that he was wrongly STRIPPED from his belts
so Jones could pick up all belts without the need for fighting DM.
Because of Jones P4P status (earned at lover weight classes)
and that he was fighting in US on HBO (most popular in boxing)
venues he was considered as the best LHW ...

CONSIDERED and AWARDED to be the best but not EARNED in the ring.

If not the bull**** stripping of IBF/WBA/WBC belts Jones would be
required to fight right guys to be properly recognized as a champion.
He did not so he should have no claim to be called the best LHW
REGARDLESS what is everybody's opinion about his greatness
... maybe he would **** DM when he fought him maybe he would not
but he didn't PROVE IN TH RING he was better.

 

So at the time of starting a new lineage, the winner fot he fight between the two top men (assuming the victory is legitimate of course) is a good indication for who the best man is.

For the immediate future you'd assume either that man or the man who beats the man is also the top man.

I'd agree with both of them assumptions.

However linearity isn't a god given right to being the best in a division and lineal claims can fizzle out if the top level opponents and are performances are not worthy of the accolade.

Even more so if the lineage isn't universally regarded as the top prize in the division.

By the first bit I mean if a guy starts fighting **** opponents and or starts looking ****, he clearly isn't the best out there, it is clear to anyone with eyes that jones performances in the ring against top 5 opposition was superior than anyone else in the division.

By the second bit you'd be hard pressed to find anyone from that time telling Jones he wasn't a real champion yet. Did anyone in the boxing media ever make that claim to him?

Either way there are many situations throughout history where the holder of the lineal claim is not the top fighter. check out ali in the late 70's, spinks in the late 80's, foreman in the late 90's etc.

 

:roll: "best" was not the point. Something you're clearly too dumb to understand.

 

I've asked you a question, answer it now dummy

 

he was beat by Julio Gonzalez nuff said no robbery.