Video - Fury's rightful claim to the lineage

Yeah, I agree.
The only possible case against Fury being lineal champion is that he said he'd retired a few times in his 2 1/2 years off .... but since no one else in the heavyweight division established dominance and a new lineage during his brief absence, there's absolutely no valid reason to disregard his lineal claim now.

It's also worth noting that Muhammad Ali announced his retirement several times between beating Foreman in 1974 and losing to Leon Spinks in 1978, but no one doubts his claim to be lineal champion through that entire period.

 

I think that you mount a strong argument, that Fury is no longer the lineal champion, on the basis that he retired.

This would not mean that Joshua or wilder was the lineal champion, it would just mean that there wasn't one.

An announced retirement, where the champion later makes a comeback, is the most difficult subject when interpreting the lineage, because there have been many inconsistencies:

There were repeated attempts to strip John L Sullivan of the title, due to his refusal to defend it under London Prize Ring Rules. Sullivan announced his retirement after the Killrain fight, and the National Police Gazette announced that they would recognize the winner of the Peter Jackson Frank Slavin fight as the new champion. This claim evaporated after Sullivan made a comeback.

Jim Corbett announced his retirement after the Mitchell fight, and Bob Fitzsimmons and Tom Sharkey were matched for the vacant title. The fight ended in a controversial DQ win for Sharkey, and the claim understandably did not gain much support. Again it evaporated fairly quickly when Corbett came back to fight Fitzsimmons.

Now after Jim Jeffries retired, most people seem to have accepted the Hart, Burns, Johnson lineage, and almost everybody does today. You could argue that Jeffries had been out of the ring for longer than Sullivan or Corbett when they came back, but what is the statute of limitations on this, and how was it established?

Jack Dempsey also announced his retirement after the Firpo fight, and he is still universally accepted as the champion going into the first Tunney fight. Based on previous practice, the title should at least have been considered vacant until he announced his comeback.

More recent examples are even more problematic, for the standpoint of Fury's claim. Almost everybody recognizes Ezzard Charles as champion from the time that he first beat Walcott, and list's Louis's title reign as ending when he retired. In other words, Louis's declaration of retirement, is generally accepted as him relinquishing the lineal title. In order for Fury's claim to stack up today, you would have to list Louis as being the lineal champion from June 1937 to September 1950! This in my opinion would involve a bit of revisionism.

Also Muhammad Ali announced his retirement after the second Leon Spinks fight, and this is generally accepted as being the point when his title reign ended. In order for Fury's claim to stack up today, you would have to recognize Ali as being lineal until he lost to Holmes.

So what to make of this mess?

Much can depend on whether a claim for the vacant title crops up, and whether that claim gains credibility with the community at large.

There are clearly historical inconsistencies with the way that the lineage has been applied, in terms of whether a champion can surrender the lineage or not.

 

Sullivan, Corbett and Fitzsimmons all retired between winning and losing the lineal title in the ring.

 

If retirements don't count, isn't Lennox Lewis still technically the lineal champion?

 

That’s a permanent retirement which he announced and then a match was arranged for a lineal title.

Fury hasn’t retired and hasn’t lost so he’s lineal in the most literal sense of the word.

 

No, I don't think that's true.
I think Charles and Walcott were solidly the top 2 contenders when they fought in 1949 after Louis announced his retirement.
And Larry Holmes has a good claim when he beat Shavers in 1979, Shavers is regarded as #2 at that moment in time, and Holmes's claim becomes even stronger when Weaver, who he beat in June 1979 eliminates WBA champion Tate in April 1980.

While Fury was away, no one established a strong claim like that.

 

Agreed, if Wilder and Joshua fought the winner would have a strong claim, but they didn't

 

Gene Tunney is still the champ.

 

I disagree.

 

No one beat him for it.