Originally posted by LacedUp
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
boxers win championships in the ring not based off speculation and popularity
Collapse
-
Originally posted by Masters01 View PostI called you an idiot. I apologise. I just feel that individual fans who think that they can alter boxing tradition that has been upholded for centuries are not very informed on how this sport works, or at least overestimate their influence in the sport. You are not bigger than boxing.
As I stated in the original post, I hold true to the word that the man who beats the man is the man. However, in some cases, lineage doesn't mean "true champion" as the "true champion" defends against the best in his division. When that ceases as in Floyd Patterson v Liston, the Foreman/Briggs and to some extent the Tyson/Spinks cases, lineage doesn't necessarily mean "true champion".
There was also a case of misrepresentation of lineage in 1978 when Ali retired after beating Spinks, having held two belts and was stripped of one and gave up another - there were two "lineages" so to speak.
There are many flaws in lineage, and only someone who sees something as black and white refuse to see the grey stuff in between.
In the case of GGG and the MW division, I consider him the champion of the division because of this.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Masters01 View PostWell Im glad we agree then. If you're not challenging Cotto's status as lineal champ, then that's fine. You originally gave the impression that you were. If youre not, and youre not challenging boxing tradition, then this is all moot.
I said that the lineal championship does not always = True champ.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BattlingNelson View PostI wouldn't know how to define 'real champ', but Briggs was lineal that's for sure.
But was he considered THE champ? no. Not by anyone. I would actually like someone to find anyone relating to Briggs as THE champ, because at the point of which he "won" the lineage from Foreman, foreman had been fighting bums for years, whilst being stripped off the IBF/WBA titles (IIRC) because of his wish to fight unranked opponents.
Comment
-
You cannot be referring to Cotto GGG. Because GGG is the man at 160, not Cotto. Martinez wanted no part of GGG and Cotto had better duck the $h!t outa GGG. This post would have made sense at 147. But the long time bane of 160 is the man there. Not a fat welterweight who gambled for glory and got it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bushbaby View PostYou cannot be referring to Cotto GGG. Because GGG is the man at 160, not Cotto. Martinez wanted no part of GGG and Cotto had better duck the $h!t outa GGG. This post would have made sense at 147. But the long time bane of 160 is the man there. Not a fat welterweight who gambled for glory and got it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LacedUp View PostApology accepted.
As I stated in the original post, I hold true to the word that the man who beats the man is the man. However, in some cases, lineage doesn't mean "true champion" as the "true champion" defends against the best in his division. When that ceases as in Floyd Patterson v Liston, the Foreman/Briggs and to some extent the Tyson/Spinks cases, lineage doesn't necessarily mean "true champion".
There was also a case of misrepresentation of lineage in 1978 when Ali retired after beating Spinks, having held two belts and was stripped of one and gave up another - there were two "lineages" so to speak.
There are many flaws in lineage, and only someone who sees something as black and white refuse to see the grey stuff in between.
In the case of GGG and the MW division, I consider him the champion of the division because of this.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LacedUp View PostYes he was lineal champ.
But was he considered THE champ? no. Not by anyone. I would actually like someone to find anyone relating to Briggs as THE champ, because at the point of which he "won" the lineage from Foreman, foreman had been fighting bums for years, whilst being stripped off the IBF/WBA titles (IIRC) because of his wish to fight unranked opponents.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bushbaby View PostYou cannot be referring to Cotto GGG. Because GGG is the man at 160, not Cotto. Martinez wanted no part of GGG and Cotto had better duck the $h!t outa GGG. This post would have made sense at 147. But the long time bane of 160 is the man there. Not a fat welterweight who gambled for glory and got it.
Comment
Comment