So is the lineal 160 title now vacant?

[Eastcoast]

That's how a lineal title is created when there is none though. Hopkins did it the right way, unifying and becoming undisputed.

I disagree that it's been trash at middleweight. The middleweight lineal crown is one of the few remaining that can be traced back over a decade. It's a complete mess though now since Cotto & now Canelo.

I'm guessing The Ring belt will be taken away and Golovkin can win that, but that obviously isn't synonymous with lineal. I would ask Cliff Rodd how long he considers it would take for Canelo not to be lineal champ anymore. If he campaigns at 154 for 2-3 fights, why would he still be lineal middleweight champ? I thought if a fighter loses, retires or leaves the division the lineage is broken.

Since Greb, there's actually been two lineal MW champions who retired, taking their version of the lineal title with them, one being Monzon.

To me, the lineal title means nothing, it's a random little factoid. If you trace back Alvarez's version of the lineal title to Hopkins, that's as far as that lineage goes. Hopkins won a vacant IBF title, Joppy's WBA came from Castro who won it as a vacant, Holmes WBC title can be traced back to when Julian Jackson won it as a vacant. The lineal title means nothing. There's a top dog to every division and that is the only thing that matters.


Golovkin holds the 3 belts like Hopkins did. Once he beats Saunders, there's absolutely no disputing his claim on the division.

[b00g13man]

Depends on whether or not the move is permanent. Back to back fights at 154 or below is enough to warrant it imo.

[Pigeons]

If Canelo remains at 154 after the Smith fight, the lineage will be vacated.

[R-C]

since Canelo agreed to move up to 160, I'm sure he's still be MW Champion.

[ИATAS]

Since Greb, there's actually been two lineal MW champions who retired, taking their version of the lineal title with them, one being Monzon.

To me, the lineal title means nothing, it's a random little factoid. If you trace back Alvarez's version of the lineal title to Hopkins, that's as far as that lineage goes. Hopkins won a vacant IBF title, Joppy's WBA came from Castro who won it as a vacant, Holmes WBC title can be traced back to when Julian Jackson won it as a vacant. The lineal title means nothing. There's a top dog to every division and that is the only thing that matters.


Golovkin holds the 3 belts like Hopkins did. Once he beats Saunders, there's absolutely no disputing his claim on the division.

Well it does depend entirely on the circumstances. I do hold value in the lineal crown. To be the man you have to beat the man who beat the man and so on. In theory that's awesome. In reality, obviously there are times when it gets all out of whack. Canelo being a perfect example, Stevenson to a degree (Tarver beat Jones, Hopkins beat Tarver, Dawson beat Hopkins, Stevenson beat Dawson...and yet Kovalev has three belts).

And right, you can trace this lineage over a decade. Hopkins unified, beat all the top guys and eventually owned 5 of the major belts (WBA, WBC, WBO, IBF and The Ring and it doesn't matter who won vacant belts that's irrelevant since these guys were the top rated fighters and ended up defending those titles)). Taylor beat Hopkins. Pavlik beat Taylor. Martinez beat Pavlik. Cotto beat Martinez and here we are. That's over ten years of a clear lineal crown. Now it's ****ed up and there is no question Gennady, who owns three of the four major belts, is the best in the division. Still, as a fan, it sucks for me that it's turned out this way as I wanted the lineage to continue).

[Lester Tutor]

Floyd retained 147 after challenging Alvarez...

[Eastcoast]

Well it does depend entirely on the circumstances. I do hold value in the lineal crown. To be the man you have to beat the man who beat the man and so on. In theory that's awesome. In reality, obviously there are times when it gets all out of whack. Canelo being a perfect example, Stevenson to a degree (Tarver beat Jones, Hopkins beat Tarver, Dawson beat Hopkins, Stevenson beat Dawson...and yet Kovalev has three belts).

And right, you can trace this lineage over a decade. Hopkins unified, beat all the top guys and eventually owned 5 of the major belts (WBA, WBC, WBO, IBF and The Ring and it doesn't matter who won vacant belts that's irrelevant since these guys were the top rated fighters and ended up defending those titles)). Taylor beat Hopkins. Pavlik beat Taylor. Martinez beat Pavlik. Cotto beat Martinez and here we are. That's over ten years of a clear lineal crown. Now it's ****ed up and there is no question Gennady, who owns three of the four major belts, is the best in the division. Still, as a fan, it sucks for me that it's turned out this way as I wanted the lineage to continue).

Now you bring up an interesting point with Stevenson. He was never the actual lineal champion. Michalzewski beat Virgil Hill for the lineal title, then lost it it to Gonzalez, who lost it to Denis Grachev, who then lost it to Edwin Rodriguez (all fights at LHW). La Bomba then lost to Ward at 168 (though Rodriguez weighed 170 for that fight).

So going by your stance on lineal titles, you should recognize Andre Ward as the true champion at LHW. When Kovalev beats Ward, he'll have the lineal title, not Stevenson. Stevenson was given the Ring title which is voted on by a couple of journalists.

[kafkod]

There's several unofficial middleweight lineages going around right now. Golovkin has an unofficial lineal title after beating Murray if you think he unofficially beat Martinez. Alfonso Blanco has an official lineal title after beating Sergey Khomitsky, who unofficially beat Murray before Golovkin. Eubank Jr might have an unofficial lineal title for beating Nick Blackwell, who may have unofficially beaten Sergey Khomitsky before Blanco.

I guess after fighting Eubank, Golovkin should go for Blanco to cover all his bases.

haha fortunately there is no such thing as unofficial lineages since normal people just follow the official wins and losses and don't go by who they personally thought won the fight.

There is no such thing as official lineages either, unless you believe the Ring magazine really is the Bible of boxing, and whatever they say goes.

This is why we, as fans, shouldn't allow ourselves to get too precious about any lineage. The concept works, but only on a short term basis.

What I mean by that is ... The Man Who Beat The Man is only The Man himself for as long as he keeps on fighting, and beating, the best challengers in his division. If he starts avoiding tough challenges, then he isn't The Man any longer, and that lineage should end with him, even if he doesn't get beaten in the ring.

[Mr.Fantastic]

It should. It's unfair to the boxers that are actually putting in work in the division.

[ИATAS]

Now you bring up an interesting point with Stevenson. He was never the actual lineal champion. Michalzewski beat Virgil Hill for the lineal title, then lost it it to Gonzalez, who lost it to Denis Grachev, who then lost it to Edwin Rodriguez (all fights at LHW). La Bomba then lost to Ward at 168 (though Rodriguez weighed 170 for that fight).

So going by your stance on lineal titles, you should recognize Andre Ward as the true champion at LHW. When Kovalev beats Ward, he'll have the lineal title, not Stevenson. Stevenson was given the Ring title which is voted on by a couple of journalists.

175 was a weird situation as well and a bad example. Gonzalez lost to Zsolt Erdei actually and he was technically lineal champ until he moved to cruiser weight. I don't remember the details but The Ring belt passed the hands of Jones, Tarver and Johnson. It was a confusing time for sure but prior to that, Jones had three of the four belts while Michalzewski was lineal champ (lost to Gonzalez who lost to Zsolt). But it was all cleared up when the #1 vs #2 happened after the lineage was broken so the current lineal champion is still Stevenson which he got from beating Dawson.