Top 2 fighting = Linearage. Wlad beating Peter and Byrd arguably makes him linear, depending when you had Ruiz/Valuev/Chagaev at the time
In the history of boxing, there have been times when there was no lineal champion because he retired or became inactive. In such a case the two fighting for the title the lineal champion last held was the new lineal champion. This is a reason why Vitali was the ring magazine champion. The other reason was he was rated #1 by Ring Magazine, and all the other 3rd party ratings such as fightnews.com, Espn.com, and Box rec.
Top 2 decided by who??? It is too speculative that is why I feel only a fully unified title justifies annointment as linear champ in the current situation. Wlad didnt beat the linear champ to win his title so has no more claim than Vitali or Chagaev.
I agree with you, I dont consider Hart or Burns anything other than titlists, Johnson became linear by beating Jefferies, Holmes by beating a comebacking Ali, Tyson by beating Spinks, Lewis by beating Briggs. They were already titlists and probably the best in the division prior to these victories. The pride of the linear title is that it can only be won by beating the man who beat the man....
I have no problem with Vitali being the #1 at the time My bigger issue is with Sanders being the #3. First off, Ring stretched things a little because originally it was meant to be that only the #1 and #2 guys fighting would lead to their C ranking, the recognised linear champ. They changed that to say the #1 guy beating either #2 or #3 would do. Sanders shocks Wlad, along with the rest of us. From being totally unranked, Ring suddenly shoot him right up to #3. Well, I don't know what Wlad's Ring rating was at the time but you had to figure it was right up there, probably just behind Lewis. It's not something they've always repeated with similar upgrades, but okay, I guess it was just that unexpected and Sanders get rewarded. Vitali has the scrap with Lewis then pummels the blubbery Kirk to establish his credentials. Sanders, on the other hand, does absolutely nothing for 13 months except ditch the WBO belt and get some more golf in. By the time he gets round to fighting Vitali, rusty and with unneeded extra weight, not only arguably should his ranking be either lower or not registered due to doing nothing for over a year, but during that time Wladimir has lost again, to Lamon Brewster this time...diluting the mercurial value of Sanders win over him. Like I say, Vitali is a bona fide #1. Everyone is expecting him to now be dominant for years. Confident this will happen, Ring make him the Champion. Sanders, on the other hand, then totally drops out of their rankings altogether. Whoa! Going 8 rounds with the #1 guy apparently isn't good enough...even when Peter suffered the same against Vitali he fell but still clocked in a #7 ranking. Sanders just disappears. Jolly good thing he held onto that #3 ranking just long enough! Meantime, debatable or not, Chris Byrd is floating around as the #2. That's the guy that Vitali should've beaten up to become the big champ. Byrd is unlikely to want it, Vitali is likely to win it, but regardless that should've been the #1 vs #2 fight. You push for that one. Instead, Sanders becomes a handy pawn. And The Ring's seemingly safe bet backfires as Vitali's injuries pile up and he's forced to ditch the belt with only one, voluntary, defence against Danny Williams. I think The Ring jumped the gun, plain and simple. Not a knock on Vitali whatsoever, he was the best heavyweight around in my eyes, but you have to do it in the ring and not just on "oh, we know he'd beat him". Considering the struggles both Holyfield and Lewis had to get that top ranking, it really felt premature.
The system that you are proposing is at least consistent unlike the acepted lineage. In order to produce a consistent lineage we would have to either (A) acept the system that you are advocating where the title onbly changes hands in the ring or (B) say that when a champion retires he waves all right to the title. (A) means that Hart and Burns get struck off the list of lineal champions. (B) means that Tom Sharkey is added to the list of lineal champions.
While your criticisms are fair I would point out that the circumstances under which Marvin Hart gained the lineal title were far worse.
This is my lineage of the Heavyweight title Corbett Fitzsimmons Jeffries Johnson Willard Dempsey Tunney Line Broken New line created by Schmelling beating Sharkey Schmelling Sharkey Carnera Baer Braddock Louis Charles Walcott Marciano Line Broken New line created by Patterson beating Moore Patterson Liston Ali Frazier Foreman Ali L. Spinks Ali Holmes M.Spinks Tyson Douglas Holyfield Bowe Holyfield Moorer Foreman Briggs Lewis Rahman Lewis Line Broken
I dont think Sanders did near enough to be top3 let alone top2. Sanders lost to Rahman who lost to Ruiz who lost to Jones. Ruiz beat far more ranked opponents than Sanders, as did Byrd, as did Rahman. He also only faced 2 ranked opponents in Wlad and Rahman, if I'm not wrong I think Wlad has a better claim for linearity after beating Peter and Byrd back to back
Wlads problem is that he beat the right people at the wrong time (when they were rankled outside the top 3). Vitally beat the wrong person at the right time (while he was ranked top 3)
The last true (as in the dictionary definition of Lineage) Lineage champion was Bruno Girard and he gave up his 168lbs crown in 2001.
The Ring Magazine isn't the be all and end all and its rankings aren't perfect, 1 win against Wladdy shouldn't have bumped Sanders above Ruiz and Byrd
Should n'thas verry little to do with it. The fact is they did. Also "fair" has nothing to do with it either. It is just a point of technicality.