Why do people say "Lineal" when they mean "Ring"

That's reasonable. Let's agree to disagree. (And imo Fury could be called a ring lineal, but I just don't think he really needs a "term". He had a huge accomplishment that speaks for itself and doesn't need to fit into a box that doesn't really fit because the modern boxing world has moved beyond imo)

 

As other posters have pointed out, most old school boxing fans are all over the place on this issue. I think defending to rings rankings is both inconsistent with it's historical meaning and too deferential to one specific "corrupt" organization, instead of all them. If you are going by concencus and not ring, well that's better I guess but it's still not Lineal, it's just a value judgment as to who the best champ is. And how do you handle retirement? So Vitali lost lineal when he retired? That goes against history. Holmes and Johnson weren't viewed as lineal until they beat long retired past lineal champs.

Again, to each their own, my point is that your concept of 'lineal" is not historic and would be better served by coming up with a new name for it to suit the changing times.

 

I think it will happen if AJ beats Wlad. There will be alot of money in making it happen.
But yes, it's basically its virtually impossible to do in the modern era. But people like the word and are changing its meaning to allow continued use of the term instead of just making a new word.