Linear Title?

[Tiozzo]

I mean, there are so many title belts, how do you know which is the linear title?

And when did Pacquiao and Mayweather win linear titles?

Mayweather became lineal WW champ when he beat Baldomir, and he became lineal champ again (because his lineage was lost) when he beat Mosley, who had won it by beating Margarito

Pacquiao has never been WW lineal champ

[Anthony342]

Yes, that's correct, he was lineal Flyweight and Featherweight champ. He was also Ring Featherweight champ, Super Featherweight and Light Welterweight champion.

Mayweather was lineal champion at Super Featherweight and won Ring title belts at Lightweight and Welterweight.

[Anthony342]

some of you guys don't know how the lineage works

when the lineal title is lost (example Lewis retiring), the lineage can be re-established if the no. 1 and no.2 ranked fighters, and in some instances, the no. 1 and no.3, fight

that is why Wlad K. is the lineal champion since he beat Chagaev, or that Pascal became lineal champ by beating Dawson

see this link for more
http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/pastchp.htm

Oh yeah (slaps forehead). Isn't this also what Ring magazine does? I've heard Ring, Cyber Boxing Zone and Boxing Scene sometimes disagree over lineages though?

[catalinul]

About Mayweather and Pacquiao....they have several lineal titles.

Pac:

Flyweight,featherweight,super featherweight(altough with controversial decision) and junior welterweight.

May:

junior lightweight,lightweight(altough with controversial decision) and welterweight.

The Mosley win does not mea nanother linea ltitle.Margarito and Cotto were not the top 2 universally recognized at the time with Williams inbetween them.

[Sugarj]

There can be no linear since Lewis retired, for the simple reason that Wlad and his brother will not fight each other. The line requires and championship to be uncontested, undisputed.

I'm not too sure that you know what the linear championship is. George Foreman and then Shannon Briggs were the linear champions in 1997 and then 1998 before Lewis. They were certainly not the 'uncontested, undisputed' champions. Just the men who beat the men who beat the men.....thats what the linear title is. They certainly weren't the best heavyweights in the world by any stretch at that time.

I don't think Wlad has a shout at the linear championship. Vitali has the best claim and thats the way I see it. Vitali's claim is at least as good as Schmelling or Patterson......Lewis chose not to rematch Vitali and Vitali was ahead on points at the time of the cuts stoppage. Its not as good as an actual win, but its as close as its going to get.

If Wlad wants a shout at the closest thing to the linear title he can call out his brother. That task should not be down to Vitali.

[Tiozzo]

I'm not too sure that you know what the linear championship is. George Foreman and then Shannon Briggs were the linear champions in 1997 and then 1998 before Lewis. They were certainly not the 'uncontested, undisputed' champions. Just the men who beat the men who beat the men.....thats what the linear title is. They certainly weren't the best heavyweights in the world by any stretch at that time.

I don't think Wlad has a shout at the linear championship. Vitali has the best claim and thats the way I see it. Vitali's claim is at least as good as Schmelling or Patterson......Lewis chose not to rematch Vitali and Vitali was ahead on points at the time of the cuts stoppage. Its not as good as an actual win, but its as close as its going to get.

If Wlad wants a shout at the closest thing to the linear title he can call out his brother. That task should not be down to Vitali.

please,,, how can losing by 6th round TKO to the lineal champ gives you the best claim to that championship ?

and how can we ask 2 brothers to beat the hell out of each other in a high stakes fight ? sounds wrong to me

so Wlad beating the next best HW after Vitali in Chagaev is a legit lineal championship fight to me, but I respect your opinion

[IronDanHamza]

I'm not too sure that you know what the linear championship is. George Foreman and then Shannon Briggs were the linear champions in 1997 and then 1998 before Lewis. They were certainly not the 'uncontested, undisputed' champions. Just the men who beat the men who beat the men.....thats what the linear title is. They certainly weren't the best heavyweights in the world by any stretch at that time.

I don't think Wlad has a shout at the linear championship. Vitali has the best claim and thats the way I see it. Vitali's claim is at least as good as Schmelling or Patterson......Lewis chose not to rematch Vitali and Vitali was ahead on points at the time of the cuts stoppage. Its not as good as an actual win, but its as close as its going to get.

If Wlad wants a shout at the closest thing to the linear title he can call out his brother. That task should not be down to Vitali.

I'm not sure you know how it works.

How does the fact Lewis chose not to rematch Vitali mean he has the "best claim" to be Lineal Champion? There is no best or worst claim, you either are or you're not. And, losing to the Lineal Champion by stoppage doesn't give you the "Best claim".

The Lineal Champion is always up for debate anyway. There are so many different rankings these days and different variables that a group of people will see so and so as the Lineal Champion whereas other won't. I.e When Maweather beat Mosley.

And what TBear is saying, is that when a Lineal Champion retires like Lewis, then to crown a new Lineal Champion the #1 and #2 have to fight to determine it. Then, people disagree who the #1 and #2 is so problems arise again.

That was the case but in more recent years some people allow the #1 and #3 fight for the Lineal Titles. Where it get's more confusing.

Then you have issues with blatant robberies like Johnson-Pastrano, so the Lineage is broken when it really shouldn't have been. Johnson should have kept the Lineage whereas Pastrano then took it and it went from there. Meaning the whole list of LHW Lineage was altered by an injustice.

So in basic terms, it's one big mess and like Scott said, a headache.

[Sugarj]

please,,, how can losing by 6th round TKO to the lineal champ gives you the best claim to that championship ?

and how can we ask 2 brothers to beat the hell out of each other in a high stakes fight ? sounds wrong to me

so Wlad beating the next best HW after Vitali in Chagaev is a legit lineal championship fight to me, but I respect your opinion

Did you ever watch the Lewis vs Vitali fight? That was no 6th round TKO. Vitali was getting the better of Lewis to most observers' eyes (including the judges). Full credit to Lewis for finding the blow to open up the cut which forced the stoppage. Vitali was furious and very much wanted a rematch. Lewis retired, says it all really.

Lewis was very sub par that night. I think his performance convinced him to retire. Something tells me he'd have been the underdog if a rematch was made.

Thats why I think Vitali has a better claim to the linear championship.

But no no no, Wlad does not have a claim to the linear championship. Just a couple of months before Vitali met Lewis, Wlad was sparked by Corrie Sanders......and a few fights later was stopped by Lamon Brewster. He has rebuilt well but the best claim belongs to Vitali, who hasn't lost since.

[Sugarj]

I'm not sure you know how it works.

How does the fact Lewis chose not to rematch Vitali mean he has the "best claim" to be Lineal Champion? There is no best or worst claim, you either are or you're not. And, losing to the Lineal Champion by stoppage doesn't give you the "Best claim".

The Lineal Champion is always up for debate anyway. There are so many different rankings these days and different variables that a group of people will see so and so as the Lineal Champion whereas other won't. I.e When Maweather beat Mosley.

And what TBear is saying, is that when a Lineal Champion retires like Lewis, then to crown a new Lineal Champion the #1 and #2 have to fight to determine it. Then, people disagree who the #1 and #2 is so problems arise again.

That was the case but in more recent years some people allow the #1 and #3 fight for the Lineal Titles. Where it get's more confusing.

Then you have issues with blatant robberies like Johnson-Pastrano, so the Lineage is broken when it really shouldn't have been. Johnson should have kept the Lineage whereas Pastrano then took it and it went from there. Meaning the whole list of LHW Lineage was altered by an injustice.

So in basic terms, it's one big mess and like Scott said, a headache.

My 'best claim' is subjective.....its true. But my definition of 'linear' champ is spot on. Linear comes from line, in this case it is the true championship line of who beat who....to stake the claim. There have been times where the next champion after a retirement (Tunney, Marciano, Lewis) has to be considered linear despite never beating the previous champion.

Vitali has by far the best claim. As I've said in a previous post, Wlad has no rightful claim; when Vitali met Lewis Wlad was recovering from a stoppage loss to Sanders and he had another stoppage loss a few fights later. Oh and guess who beat Sanders for the title? Vitali. He clearly has the best claim.

Vitali's performance against Lewis says it all. That was no stoppage loss other than as a boxrec statistic. It was a cut and the guy ahead on points was a touch unlucky. There was an outcry for a rematch........and despite the obvious money on the table Lewis wisely chose to retire.

Who would you say has best claim to the linear championship if not Vitali?

[IronDanHamza]

Did you ever watch the Lewis vs Vitali fight? That was no 6th round TKO. Vitali was getting the better of Lewis to most observers' eyes (including the judges). Full credit to Lewis for finding the blow to open up the cut which forced the stoppage. Vitali was furious and very much wanted a rematch. Lewis retired, says it all really.

Yes, it was a 6 Round TKO.

Thats why I think Vitali has a better claim to the linear championship.

Flawed logic if I ever saw it.

Vitali has a "better claim" to the Lineal Championship on the basis he performed well in a losing effort to the Lineal Champion at that time? Which was in 9 years ago, by the way.

But no no no, Wlad does not have a claim to the linear championship.

He certainly does. Certainly more than Vitali Klitschko has in 2012.

Just a couple of months before Vitali met Lewis, Wlad was sparked by Corrie Sanders......and a few fights later was stopped by Lamon Brewster. He has rebuilt well but the best claim belongs to Vitali, who hasn't lost since.

And? What relevance does this have? This was like a decade ago. Things change.

Vitali hasn't lost since.........He also retired for 4 years. Is Vitali Klitchko the Lineal Champion until the day he actually retires for good? Based on losing a Lineal Champion?

Vitali Klitschko has done NOTHING to be considered the Lineal Champion since he came out of retirement. Literally, nothing.

Wlad has beaten better fighters, more ranked fighters, and if anyone is the Lineal Champion at HW right now, It's Wladimir Klitschko and no one else.