Who do you regard as the last Undisputed Heavyweight Champion

lewis. based on opposition fought. the man makes the belt, not the other way around.

 

Lewis

 

Tyson Fury ... currently.

Since Tyson Fury won the WBA, WBO, IBF and RING titles ...

Charles Martin, Joseph Parker, Anthony Joshua, Andy Ruiz, Oleksandr Usyk, Daniel Dubois, Trevor Bryan, Manuel Charr and Joe Joyce (and soon to be Hrgovic) have all claimed one or more versions of those belts ...

And none of them ever fought Fury, let alone beat him for any of them.

Because ratings bodies are made up of idiots who want to feel "in control" ... some person or some org will always come up with a rule or make a new belt and name someone else a "champ."

Just because some clowns come up with a "new rule" ... announce so-and-so didn't follow that rule ... and they claim "this guy" is the champ now ... doesn't mean anything is really in dispute.

Tyson Fury is the World Heavyweight Champion.

When someone beats Tyson Fury, they'll be the World Heavyweight Champion.

 

Lennox Lewis. The HW GOAT

 

Lennox Lewis, GOAT

 

Henry Akinwande was the undefeated WBO Champ. About six months before the Lewis fight, Akinwande defended his WBO title for the last time against Scott Welch (January 1997).

At the time, you couldn't hold both belts. The orgs wouldn't allow it. They "made up rules" to prevent it. But the boxers wanted to fight. So, only months after last defending his WBO belt, Akinwande dropped his belt and he and Lewis fought. Lewis won.

Now, people go "why didn't Lewis fight for the WBO belt?"

I don't know why some people think "arbitrary rules" made up by people outside the ring who desperately want to feel in control of something are more important than fights inside the ring.

What happens inside the ring is always more important.

Boxing fans collect fight films, they don't collect "rules" meetings by sanctioning bodies.

The WBC and the WBO champs decided to fight. The orgs didn't like it. So the WBO champed dropped his belt and they fought.

Lewis faced the guy who was undefeated WBO champ up until right before they signed to fight ... and Lewis won.

Lewis fought about half the men who had been WBO champs in his era - including Mercer, Morrison, Akinwande, Vitali - and he defeated all of them.

He only missed Damiani, Bent, Hide, Bowe, Byrd and Wlad. But it was hard to keep up, because the belt was won, lost and just dropped all the time. (Bowe, Akinwande, Moorer, Mercer all vacated it.)

Hell, Bowe dumped it because Evander Holyfield and he were going to fight, and Evander said he didn't want the WBO belt on the line because he'd lose his ranking with the other orgs. So Bowe just dumped it.

 

No, it's not. Mike Tyson held "all the sanctioning body belts" and he wasn't the undisputed champion. Michael Spinks had NO sanctioning body belts and he was considered the actual champion until he and Tyson fought. And then Tyson beat him, and months later the WBO was created and they named ANOTHER person (Damiani) champ.

Even if Fury and Usyk fight ... there will be two other guys with WBA and WBO belts (Dubois and Joyce).

And as soon as whoever has the WBA belt fights Dubois, the WBA will name a new "regular" champ.

It's a circle jerk.

Tyson Fury is the World Champion. Fury had his first belt (the IBF) stripped from him 10 days after winning it in the ring because he wouldn't sign to fight freaking Czar Glazkov. (I'm sure there are fans now who never even saw him fight.)

Since then, Charles Martin, Anthony Joshua, Andy Ruiz, Anthony Joshua (again) and Usyk have all claimed it.

None of them beat Fury. Not one. Never even fought him.

Hell, Martin, Joshua, Ruiz and Usyk should all send Czar Glazkov a percentage of their title fight checks because he's the only reason they had an IBF strap to fight for.

If you focus on what happens in the ring and not all the bull outside the ring, there's not much in dispute.

 

Mike Tyson.

The proliferation of Mickey Mouse organisations means that we will probably never have an undisputed champion in any division ever again.

I can understand the use of the word undisputed for the holder of all the meaningful belts but I disagree with it - undisputed means undisputed.

 

Lewis. There is no other answer. The WBO belt was not regarded back then.

 

"Undisputed" should be changed to "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt."

Because there's always going to be some org or some groups trotting out some rule "they made up" to take a belt off someone and make a new title and hand it to someone else.

 

If we cut all the bull**** out of the equation (aphabet belts) then Wlad was the last, he was unquestionably the best at the time, Fury decisioned him but has ****ed around for years muddying the waters since.

 

Hard tu say. Either Lennox or Wlad.