Who is the lineal heavyweight champion of the world in boxing?

that's just an internet myth that gets repeated a lot on these boards.

the best counter example is robinson beating bell for the WW championship. bell was barely top 10 ranked at the time.

 

Maybe it is a myth, but I personally believe that Wlad is #1 in the world but it is not conclusive that he would beat #2 Vitali (not that I expect them to fight) and therefore it is difficult to call him lineal champion.

 

well what is a "lineal champion" anyway? I mean what worth did it have when it was foreman v briggs? the real champ then was clearly the winner of tyson v holyfield.

at the end of the day the way I see it, being "the man" is more impressive than beating "the man". anyone can have an off night, but not anyone can maintain performance and qualit of opposition enough to carry the title of champion (case in point tyson after prison clearly usurped foreman)

so anyways Lewis clearly was the undisputed champion he'd beaten every belt holder and every claimant. when he retired, the lineage that could be traced back to holmes (but in all reality traced back to tyson in 96) retired with him.

as I said before, vitali had a brief spell at the top picking up the wbc and ring championships, plus beating the wbo champ, but then he retired, so any claim he had retired with him.

sin 06 byrd was ranked number 1 and held the ibf title, wlad beat him. wlad also beat two wba title holders and a wbo title holder. the wbc champ (peter) had already been defeated by wlad. the next wbc champ (vitali) has stated over and over he'll never fight his brother.

wlad is regarded by the vast majority as the ture heavyweight champ, the minority gets smaller every day and is lagely irrelevant.


just to bring up your point about "conclusive" it is just a matter of opinion and specualtion. if vitali wants to challenge wlad's position at the top, he has to either beat him, or beat significantly better opposition to usurp his claim. he has zero intention of doing either.

 

The Lineal Champion is the Man Who Beat The Man, it doesn't necessarily mean he has a belt.

 

as it stands wlad is the man, and the lineage will be traced from whoever can defeat him.

 

I thought you'd learnt by now that this just isn't the case?!?

it can be 1 v 2 to start up a new lineage, but there's no written rule saying it has to be so.

as it stands, wlad is the man by virtue of beating all the titleholders bar his brother who says he won't fight him.

 

According to the TS it's going to be the winner of the Povetkin vs Chagaev bout, cause he will be the next WBA "regular" Champion, and so holder of the oldest belt.

I totally agree with him! :bart

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

The lineal championship has nothing to do with any belt. Its when the best fights the best (or the best available in some cases).

Belts can be bought and sold, stripped and gifted.

Beating The Man has to earned.

 

Wlad.

 

I would just use the ring belt, meaning Wlad.