Fury vs. Usyk. Good GOD that would be great to see. Unified, undisputed, undefeated………. It’d be the first time we’d had all three since, when? I’m not sure who the last unified, undisputed, AND undefeated….. Mike Tyson? Did he have all the titles when he was still undefeated?
Not Mike Tyson. After him it was Evander Holyfield (28-0-0 WBA, WBC, and IBF champion). After him Riddick Bowe (32-0-0 WBA, WBC, and IBF champion). Riddick Bowe reliquinshed the title (threw the WBC belt into trash can in favor of Lennox Lewis), although he was still undefeted, but not undisputed. After Riddick Bowe 1992. - nobody. This content is protected
One of the man reasons it didn't happen since, is that we didn't even have another undisputed champion since April 12, 2000 and counting.
What makes it worse is that people now tend to regard the WBO belt as part of the collection to become "undisputed" too. So it's FOUR belts they need now, not just THREE. In the days of Tyson, Holyfield, Bowe, Lewis, they only recognised THREE belts. Even though the WBO belt existed since 1989, nobody gave it a second thought until about 2005. So it's even more difficult now to unify and keep four belts, rather than the three which was ridiculous enough.
"Unified, undisputed" is redundant. The latter is superordinate to the former. Undisputed means you've achieved the highest degree of unification. It's like saying warm and on fire.
it's thee fight at heavyweight and AJ can count his money and do more Lynx adverts as no one thinks he is a threat to either of these two anymore
I don’t think there was no such title as a Unified champion back in Tyson’s day. You were either a holder of a version of the world title, the undisputed champion which holder of all the belts or like Michael Spinks when he gave up his IBF title, still regarded as the Lineal/Linear champion.
Mike Tyson was the last. The WBO title was created during Tyson's reign. He'd already won all the existing belts, was the reigning undisputed World Champion/Ring champion AND was undefeated when the WBO decided to form. Riddick Bowe won the WBC, WBA and IBF belts, lost them, then won the WBO belt. So he held them all, just not at the same time. Tyson Fury won the WBA, WBO and IBF belts, was stripped of them all, and then won the WBC belt (but he failed in his first challenge against WBC champ Wilder). His record isn't unblemished. He has a draw. Like Bowe, he has also held them all, just not at the same time. Usyk would be the first undefeated, unified and undisputed World Heavyweight Champion since Mike Tyson if he defeats Fury.
I believe there have only been five men in boxing history who had an unblemished record (no losses or draws) while they held all the established world heavyweight titles at that time. Rocky Marciano. Muhammad Ali. Joe Frazier. George Foreman. Mike Tyson. Not many.
Unbeaten, maybe. But not an unblemished record. Fury "unsuccessfully" challenged for the WBC belt in his first attempt at winning it and was floored twice in the fight. Mike Tyson didn't have any draws before he held all the belts. Neither did Marciano, Ali, Frazier or Foreman. Jeffries had a couple draws and a couple no-decisions before he won the title. Patterson lost to Maxim. Louis lost to Schmeling. Holmes never held the WBA belt or the WBC and IBF titles simultaneously. It's difficult to do. It's really only happened five times. And, if not for the supplemental points system in the first LaStarza fight (because their fight was even in rounds), Marciano wouldn't be on the list, either. It would be exciting if it happened.
Again - you can just say "undefeated & undisputed". Enumerating "unified" is unnecessary, it's already included with undisputed. You're marking two distinct characteristics of a champion, not three.
