Reading this forum it seems a lot of posters have no clue what"LINEAL CHAMPION" means

[therealpugilist]

The WBC is not the Lineal title

Lineal titles can only be lost, if a fighter leaves the division,retires or loses

Ring belt is not the Lineal title although they are sometimes the same


Cotto is still the Lineal 160 champion and Ring champion

People on this forum speak on topics they don't understand everyday and not too many people have followed boxing, they may follow a fighter or two but not the sport


How can you be a real boxing fan and support people getting stripped for trinkets they didn't lose in the ring, move up in weight or retire?


Unless its a unification fight, I don't care much for the alphabet boys



The real champion is the lineal champion...the man who beat the man.....alphabet boys strip fighters more than they let them defend their titles.

[Syf]

5

You can't be 'stripped' of the lineage, so to speak, as it's historical and not evaluative. But many would argue that 'the man' is no longer the man when he refuses to face a clear No.1 challenger for an extended period of time. That is certainly the case with Cotto.

And adonis, to a slightly lesser extent.

I look at it like bloodlines. You can be descended from a mighty lineage and claim the name, but if the bloodline gets diluted and you are not made of the same stuff as your forebears, it doesn't MEAN nearly as much. It goes from being a proud heritage, to merely a title, in name only.

You got guys out there fat, eating bugles, and playing x box that could ultimately be related to William Wallace or even a king... does it MEAN anything? Not at all, not unless that person HONORS the name and heritage.

Ducking clearly at a weight you are lineal dishonors the heritage and takes all significance out of claiming it. Fact.

[Dr Rumack]

5

And adonis, to a slightly lesser extent.

I look at it like bloodlines. You can be descended from a mighty lineage and claim the name, but if the bloodline gets diluted and you are not made of the same stuff as your forebears, it doesn't MEAN nearly as much. It goes from being a proud heritage, to merely a title, in name only.

You got guys out there fat, eating bugles, and playing x box that could ultimately be related to William Wallace or even a king... does it MEAN anything? Not at all, not unless that person HONORS the name and heritage.

Ducking clearly at a weight you are lineal dishonors the heritage and takes all significance out of claiming it. Fact.

Yes. There have been a number of fighters who have cheapened the lineage rather than enhancing it. Cotto looks to be one of those.

[techliam]

5

And adonis, to a slightly lesser extent.

I look at it like bloodlines. You can be descended from a mighty lineage and claim the name, but if the bloodline gets diluted and you are not made of the same stuff as your forebears, it doesn't MEAN nearly as much. It goes from being a proud heritage, to merely a title, in name only.

You got guys out there fat, eating bugles, and playing x box that could ultimately be related to William Wallace or even a king... does it MEAN anything? Not at all, not unless that person HONORS the name and heritage.

Ducking clearly at a weight you are lineal dishonors the heritage and takes all significance out of claiming it. Fact.

I suppose you are right. The problem here is that 'lineal' is taken far too seeiously on face value alone.

My problem with lineal championships is with the fact it is a two track system. A vacant lineage is barely questionable, the victor of rank 1 vs rank 2 crowns the best in the division. This half of the system works great.

However, you can become lineal champion by beating the current lineal champion - its literally as black and white as that. This is regardless of the current state of the lineal champion. The issue arrises when the lineal champion and/or his successor is no longer the no.1 fighter in the division (Cotto, Stevenson, Jaro, Baldomir etc). Even look at Flyweight for example. Ruenroeng, and maybe Estrada have better wins and resumes at 112 than Roman, but the lineal title lets people assume Roman is the no.1 fighter there, when he currently is not. This is such a far cry to winning a vacant lineage, and in my view should be counted separately.

Highlighting the problem further is the inverse scenario, where theres a clear consensus no.1 fighter who isnt the lineal champion. Golovkin could be used as an example, but its not the best. Id refer to Uchiyama who has reigned over 130 for some time, who isnt the lineal champion, but has already beaten rank 2 Miura.

Context really does matter when looking at lineal titles, the sooner we stop using face value alone, the better.

[revs1227]

reading this thread I SEE NONE OF YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT LINEAL MEANS !!!! not even close wtffffffffffffff


lineal is lineage !!!! beat the man who beat the man who beat the man and being able to trace them back to the og days

jesus what the hell

[boxinghead530]

People on this forum speak on topics they don't understand everyday and not too many people have followed boxing, they may follow a fighter or two but not the sport


How can you be a real boxing fan and support people getting stripped for trinkets they didn't lose in the ring, move up in weight or retire?


Unless its a unification fight, I don't care much for the alphabet boys



The real champion is the lineal champion...the man who beat the man.....alphabet boys strip fighters more than they let them defend their titles.

That's why boxing is just a niche sport and not big time anymore. Having four and sometimes 5 to 6 champions per division fu cked things up when trying to figure out who is lineal anymore.

These days calling someone a lineal champion is just bogus. With all the titles and people getting stripped(which has been going on for years and years now by every sanctioning body) there is no such thing as a lineal champion anymore. Being a lineal champion dried up years ago. So lineal theses days means squat. You can't trace back any of these champs title victories back to the beginning. Because after all that's what being lineal means, beating the man who beat man and tracing that all the way back.

As real fans we all know who are the best and who the real champs are. So we dont need any titles or the useless lineal thing which doesn't compute in this era anyway.

[therealpugilist]

That's why boxing is just a niche sport and not big time anymore. Having four and sometimes 5 to 6 champions per division fu cked things up when trying to figure out who is lineal anymore.

These days calling someone a lineal champion is just bogus. With all the titles and people getting stripped(which has been going on for years and years now by every sanctioning body) there is no such thing as a lineal champion anymore. Being a lineal champion dried up years ago. So lineal theses days means squat. You can't trace back any of these champs title victories back to the beginning. Because after all that's what being lineal means, beating the man who beat man and tracing that all the way back.

As real fans we all know who are the best and who the real champs are. So we dont need any titles or the useless lineal thing which doesn't compute in this era anyway.

Cant say I agree totally with this assertion considering most lineage can be traced.

But I do agree with you that real fans know who the best are or who the champions are

its pretty simple, if a fighter retires or moves up then the title is vacant....when the number 1 and 2 guy fight then it determines the champion, or if they unify with top ranking guys it starts a new lineage


the sad thing is people call themselves fans but aren't wiling to do research


the best site for checking out the lineal champions and when lineage started and ended and started again in cyberboxingzone.com

[boxinghead530]

Cant say I agree totally with this assertion considering most lineage can be traced.

But I do agree with you that real fans know who the best are or who the champions are

its pretty simple, if a fighter retires or moves up then the title is vacant....when the number 1 and 2 guy fight then it determines the champion, or if they unify with top ranking guys it starts a new lineage


the sad thing is people call themselves fans but aren't wiling to do research


the best site for checking out the lineal champions and when lineage started and ended and started again in cyberboxingzone.com

To me lineal doesn't mean anything really it doesn't carry extra weight as far as being a champion. Being a alphabet champion doesn't mean anything either. As a fan I recognize who is good and who is not and who I want to see fight and who I don't want to see fight. If you want to know who a real champion is then boxing needs to rid itself of all these titles and only have one champion per division. Until then being a champion or calling someone lineal doesn't really mean anything.

Plus if you go by saying well the real champion is the one who is lineal. Well that is very flawed because getting that so called lineal title is watered down because you don't have to go through all top guys to get to it because getting to that point means you bypassed other very good fighters who are so called champions for other sanctioning bodies. So getting a so called lineal title is bogus it mean nothing just like the sanctioning bodies mean nothing.

Until boxing goes back to having one champion per division(which it never will) then being a lineal champion carries pretty much no weight just like a title does now.

[techliam]

Cant say I agree totally with this assertion considering most lineage can be traced.

But I do agree with you that real fans know who the best are or who the champions are

its pretty simple, if a fighter retires or moves up then the title is vacant....when the number 1 and 2 guy fight then it determines the champion, or if they unify with top ranking guys it starts a new lineage


the sad thing is people call themselves fans but aren't wiling to do research


the best site for checking out the lineal champions and when lineage started and ended and started again in cyberboxingzone.com

What do you mean most lineages can be traced? The only lineal championship that dates back significantly is the Flyweight lineage, stemming from 1975. The closest other is middleweight, from 2001. All other lineages have been broken, restarted, etc. You wouldnt be tracing others very far

As for your comment on CBZ, yoi are aware that they are only one place 'tracing' lineages? Their opinion alone doesnt make it universal. For example, they considered Mayweather-Mosley the start of the welterweight lineage, but the RING and TBRB did not. The RING laughably recognised Mayweather-Guerrero as the start of the line, TBRB recognised Mayweather-Pacquiao (and rightly so imo). The Mayweather-Mosley 'lineage' was barely recognised, and thus its difficult to call Mayweather a lineal champ, until Pacquiao. Lineages arent black and white, there can be dispute. Its best to refer to universally recognised lineages (ones recognised by all major places) when referring to lineages, not ones recognised only by CBZ

[oscar9992]

'Lineal Champion' doesn't mean **** nowadays...
It has a meaning when best fights best. But we all clearly see that GGG IS THE MAN IN 160, Cotto is not.

In other words it doesn't meant sh**.