World Heavyweight Championship

If you had an 'undisputed' champion, there would be no defences for the champion, as the moment the fight was arranged, there would be someone disputing his claim.

 

Well then a wholly unified champion :good

 

Once again the best may or may not be champion at any given point in time. Norton had no claim whatsoever to the worlds hwt championship....none. Ali was champion until he lost to Spinks. Norton and Young lost the decision when they actually fought Ali for the championship. Ali beat Foreman, lost to spinks and then beat spinks for the championship a third time. Judges decisions are final. Foreman beat Moorer who beat Holy etc. Foremans title reign as worlds hwt champion is totally legit.

 

Well the thing is, he did, he had the WBC claim. Ali had the WBA claim.

Lineage aint that big a deal, at any one point you can a champ of lineal, ring, wba, wbc, ibf, wbo. as a fan we have to judge which of those is the best, as a champ they have to unify their claims.

 

Yes, ideally.

I would take a 'generally recognized' champion. But while two brothers are in the top 2/3 Heavyweights in the world, even that is unlikely...:-(

 

Silly.....the only championship is the historical championship. norton was handed the title....never won it by beating the champion. Ali koed Foreman who in turn had destroyed Norton and he did not lose it until he lost it to Spinks. Your mentality is why boxing is a dead sport. You follow political body titles whose only objective s to create more fights they can call for the championship. norton like Young were never hwt champion of the world.

 

This type of logic would work only if the champion fights only the #1 contender and the best man in the division at that certain time.

 

I don't think there really was a single best Heavyweight during those years, which I know you don't like because it interrupts your timeline.

 

Well it's less clear cut than other times. My pick is Bowe.

 

but the lineal title isn't the only championship. you can live in a fantasy world were the converse is true but that doesn't fit in with the reality of boxing.

Norton was the WBC champ, Ali was the WBA champ. The better fighter of those two was Norton, imo and he proved this in the ring vs Ali in the rubber match. So Norton is my pick for man of the division :good

Boxing is not a dead sport, infact this year the two richest sportsmen were both boxers.

 

Pretty sound, especially if you feel he won the 2nd Holy fight. Does that carry up to the Golota fights and after Tyson waxed Bruno, or does Mike become the guy due to a combination of both? I know you felt Holy took the mantle back by beating Tyson in Nov '96, right?

 

Well, I think his victories over Golota are legit, because he fought like a warrior and Golota imploded both times with blatant low blows.

However whilst he's beating Golota on mentality, Tyson is smashing ten bells of **** out of Bruno to leapfrog to the top of the division. Holy beating Tyson was very clearly a fight for the top spot. The rematch was the top 2 in the division.

Lewis really solidified matters in 99 though when he completely unified the division (he'd beaten Akinwande who was WBO as well).

Riddick Bowe Nov 1992 Mar 1996
Mike Tyson Mar 1996 Nov 1996
Evander Holyfield Nov 1996 Mar 1999
Lennox Lewis Mar 1999 Apr 2001

 

The only true champion is the historical champion. The mentality you have has ruined the game.

 

Norton beat no one for the title. It was handed to him. You can trace Ali's title to his victory over Foreman and straight back to Sullivan.