top 5 Heavy/Achievement

This is especially disturbing in the colorful and storied light of British boxing history. Characters like Owen Moran, Bombardier Billy Wells, Kid Lewis, Nel Tarleton, Len Harvey, and even glass groined "Fainting Phil" Scott are names which might be completely lost to the shrouds of the past, if the modern version of their sport can't be restored to former prominence. (All the BBB of C would have to do is be the first sanctioning body with the guts to restore the 15 round limit. The U.K. would once again become the boxing mecca of a bygone era. Unfortunately, the current governors of boxing are all crooks and cowards.)

 

Uh, YEAH...that's how it works.

 

:good :good :good Good Post, I agree 100%

 

Yep, that's how it works. The IBF creates a belt and there's a new champion. The WBO creates a belt and there's a new champion. The IBO creates a belt.... and on we go. I have been following boxing a long time. I remember when there was one champion in every division. Here and there, there was a dispute, but the WBA and WBC unified and on we went. Then we started seeing two "champions" permanently as this group stripped this fighter and so on. They were stripping boxers at the drop of a hat. Then there were three "champions." Then there were four. And on it goes, with "champions" multiplying like rabbits.

You think that's good for boxing? Do you really want to be the sheep who leaps through the high grass whenever some promoter creates a sanctioning body to sell you a "championship fight"? Are you that gullible?

 

Damn, you're annoying. Speaking of "gullible," do you really believe your BS or are you just pretending to be a dick? The world has moved on...boxing has moved on. Deal with it.

But back to the original argument - You recognize Ali as being "champion" after he beat Spinks in the rematch...even though he only won ONE belt. You refuse to recognize Holyfield as champion when he did the exact same thing. Which is it? Are ALL belts needed to be called a champion, or just one? Or just a particular belt?

 

He's only counting lineal exchanges. I think you know that already. Honestly, I don't care either way. The fictional lineal belt has it's functions especially with all the sanctioning bodies floating around with their paper champions, but undisputed, or even unified, title reigns have their merits as well.
Holyfield, however, does not surpass Ali in both criteria. Ali was lineally recognized thrice, while Evander only two times; Ali was undisputed twice (now excluding the Spinks win you so avidly lobby against), Evander ties him with two as well

 

You're quick with the insults. I could insult you here, but I won't. Calling people "dick" and whatnot just shows the weakness of your position. People who are insecure insult other people.

So I will just kindly point out that your question shows us that you don't understand the point of world championship. Ali would have needed to hold no belt to be the world champion. He was the world champion at the time because he beat the reigning world champion (George Foreman). The fact that the WBA sanctioned the bout with Spinks is meaningless for the world championship.

Muhammad Ali defeating Leon Spinks is completely different from Holyfield defeating Tyson or Moorer for the WBA belt. In the Ali's case, Leon Spinks was the world champion. In Holyfield's case, neither Tyson nor Moorer were the world champion.

I can help you understand this is you still don't get it. I'm a helpful person. But if you are going to insult me then we can't have a rational discussion and you can't learn anything. Is that cool?

 

- Yawn - Recognize whichever "champion" you wish, or none at all.

May I infer then, that the last HW champion you recognize was Lewis? And that it will likely be 20 years before there is another "true" champ? Or do you recognize the linear holder (who is that anyway-I lost track) as being "the" current champ?

BTW - You insulted first, I merely responded in kind. And your attempt at humor via your condescending tone is neither witty nor necessary. No hard feelings though.

 

I didn't insult you. You came on like a hard charger from the get go. I asked you if you intended to accept whatever champion some group of men after sanctioning fees threw at you. I used the sheep metaphor. Maybe you thought that was mean. If so, I apologize. But you are still ducking the question. I going to assume the answer is yes.

To answer your question, yes, Lewis was the last heavyweight champion. I grew up with the WBA and WBC, as did most people here (and a few even remember the NBA and the NYSAC, which spawned the WBA and the WBC), so if they unify those titles, I will accept whomever wins that fight as the champion. I would hope The Ring would as well. They could help a lot to make order out of madness.

But I am guessing that if the Ring were to say this, then the IBF, WBO, and every other mickey mouse alphabelt would sue the magazine, as the Ring endorsement of the long standing historical tradition would hurt their ability to market their product. Restraint of trade or some other such bull**** would be the reasoning.

Honestly, I rather there be no champion than multiple titlists.

 

I could probably live with that. Actually, back in the 80's I recall Howartd Cosell (after he decided to hate boxing) goofing on there being 16 sanctioning bodies recognizing champions.
Since then I've often expected (dreaded) that the different sanctioning bodies might follow in the mold of professional wrestling, which eclipsed boxing in popularity in the 80's. Something like the WWF having it's own stable of wrestlers, who only wrestle in WWF, with Hulk Hogan as champion; and WCW doing the same with Rick Flair as their champion.

It never went quite that far, but... as boxing champions go, there are many champions but rarely is anyone THE champion. I think those days are over. Nowadays, the alphabet title holder who has the best PR machine behind him is generally recognized as champion.

 

As of now, Tyson have never drew in the large crowd that Dempsey drew in, His fights with Carp, Firpo and Tunney are still in the top ten all time largest attended of ALL time. The only fight that "Beat" the first tunney fight was Chavez's free amission fight. Tyson never capture a crowd like that. Yes a million bucks may be small change today compare to sports, but at the time of the Dempsey era, it was BIG. Dempsey made more money in one fight, than the Babe made in a whole season of baseball. The only reason Tyson makes the 8 or 9 million today in fights is because our money vaule went up compare to the 1920's.

Over all Dempsey is the biggest draw in boxing. And that includes Ali. I belive the only time Ali drew in a crowd like that was Ali Fraizer 1 and 3 perhaps. Maybe Foreman.