Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by djanders, Mar 24, 2021.
What’s a lineal champion?
The generally recognised champion of a weight division. Ideally being the fighter who beat the man who was the man etc. But if need be the fighter who gained general recognition when the title was considered vacant.
Lt Heavy-Archie Moore...
Flyweight- Pascual Perez
Basically, the Lineal Champion is the True World Champion of a Weight Division. To gain that distinction, a fighter generally has to beat the previous World Champion (while he still holds the title). If the Champion retires, and it's generally believed he will stay retired, then the Lineal title goes VACANT, until the #1 Contender and the Number 2 Contender meet in the ring, with the Lineal Title at stake. But, if for some reason, the #1 and #2 Contenders cannot or will not (for whatever reason) fight each other (and it's understood that they probably never will meet), then the #1 and #3 Contenders can meet and the winner will be declared the Lineal Champion. The most recent situation, in the Heavyweight Division, following the retirement of Lewis, was when the Klitschko brothers would not meet in the ring, so #3 Chagaev met #1 Wladimir Klitschko for the Lineal Title. Fury then became Lineal Champion when he defeated Wladimir in the ring. It's actually possible for the Lineal Champion to have NONE of the belts in boxing (today: WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO), but that's rare.
That about says it. Sorry I didn't see this before I put in my long winded explanation.
From what I've read in here, the young guys seem to have a pretty good grasp on boxing, and its many nuances. I don't always agree with the conclusions, but I would admit they're usually well thought out and explained, and they come from a place where great knowledge of the sport resides. In Walcott's case, I believe he looked better in person than on film, mainly because it's often hard to see on some films whether a punch landed or not. Walcott had deceptively fast hand speed. Most of the time, I would say, if, on film, if it looks like Jersey Joe might have landed a punch, he probably did. I've found you can hear the fight better, in person, especially if seated near the ring. In Walcott's case that helps a lot. Of course, with some films, you have the advantage of slow motion replays, so watching a fight in both ways is preferred, whenever possible. With SOME of the TV announcers, though not all, I've turned the sound off so I could better judge the fight for myself.
Full Reveal: I generally rank Jersey Joe higher than most do. I have him at #10 all time. I admit that some of that may be because I was born in, and lived most of my life in, you guessed it: JERSEY.
Light Heavyweight-Archie Moore
Middleweight-Sugar Ray Robinson
I was only kidding guys, I’m relatively young so although when I was born there were still lineal champs, but since I started watching they’ve been few and far between in certain divisions so I couldn’t help but take a dig
I don't pay much attention to who is, or isn't, a lineal champion.
If there's some trivia question here about world champions, we all know that by "world" champion, in recent times we mean someone recognized by one or more of the "Big Four"... which is also how BoxRec lists the champions. Whether they are lineal or not.
Now imagine, if 200 years from now (if boxing still exists??) there have been so many champions, that people by then agree to only recognize those who have been lineal title holders. That would result in someone like GGG being written out of the history books - even though he was easily the best MW for most of the last decade. But he had to sit there with his WBA crown, and watch for years the lineal title go from Pavlik to Martinez to Cotto to Canelo... until Canelo finally decided GGG was so much past prime, that he agreed to meet him for all the marbles.
So to become lineal champion, you need to have the right people behind you to get the right fights... and in some cases (Cotto) a bit of luck!
That's a golden era all right!!
A great line up!!
GC, you're younger than our very own Dubya Dubya???
Lovely, golden and nostalgic era for me.
I thought so too, he was 35 when he retired in 1977.