Dominating one weight class or winning titles in multiple, which is better?

[BennyST]

Originally Posted by BatteredKessler

still, I say it all depends on the opposition faced (although I do agree that a fighter moving up through several weight classes usually doesn't take on the best fighters in each one of them)

if you clean out a weak division, and there are periods like that, how is that so impressive ? I'm well aware that it is easy to become a multi-division champ today by taking on the weakest challenges, but it is not that easy to go up in weight again and again if you face the one or 2 best fighters in those weight classes

Pacquiao is a good recent example

at LW, he took on the least dangerous title holder, David Diaz
to me, he hasn't really left a mark at lightweight depsite grabbing the WBC title

just one fight at JWW too, but at least he took on the lineal champion, Hatton

there were other good challenges left like Bradley, but taking on the recognized number 1 in a division then moving up, I don't have too much problems with that

WW, he took on washed up DLH, went on to defeat no. 2 Cotto and highly ranked Clottey, that's pretty good

then went up again

now he will either move up or down, but the Margarito win is even worse than the Diaz win as far as achievements in a given weight class are concerned

but at the end of the day, what will have been more impressive, Pacquiao staying at LW or JWW, cleaning it up, or pursue good challenges going up again and again ? to me, the answer is clear cut

so if I sum up my point with an equation :

taking on the 1 or 2 best fighters in a division then move up >>>>>>> stay for a long time in one division to clean it up (and that means facing sometimes unworthy mandatories, unifications and stuff)

Absolutely. It always depends on the opponents faced. You could have one fighter that's a ten time, ten division champ over ten years and a guy who's a one time champ with a six year long reign. The one time champ could still have faced much better competition and be considered better. It's all about the opponent.

See, even the Hatton example as a Lineal champ is a funny one. He had done very, very little at 140 since winning the Lineal title and decades ago would probably have lost it because he would have had to face the best fighters coming through, which at his time would have meant facing Cotto, Bradley, Witter, Mayweather etc.

He didn't face any of those guys and had about four 140 fights over five years. Shot Castillo, Maussa, Malignaggi and Urango. He didn't face the first, second or third best fighter in the division once as a champion. Not once. Although if someone brings up Castillo as the number one ranked fighter....Well, I think everyone will just laugh. He had one win against Herman NDougjo at 140 and in no way possible does that get you a number one spot over the other champions.

It's another symptom of the boxing title climate. How does a guy stay a lineal world champion without ever facing a number one, two or three contender?

If you compare it with Tszyu's reign, everyone that sat at number one and two behind him was fought and beaten. The other two most dominant fighters, he fought as Lineal champ. He would probably have been stripped otherwise. How did Hatton get away with it?

Lineal champ? Yeah, sure he was. Only in boxing world.

[McGoorty]

Originally Posted by Barnburner

Say the average level of opponents is the same.

I think it's very even, as most of the others say it probably comes down to the level of and how many opponents and title defences they have. Take the great brown bomber, his title reign against all comers and the fact that Joe Louis never dodged an opponent in his life, means that in terms of achievement Joe Louis has a huge claim on number one,,. who disagree's ??????

[McGoorty]

Originally Posted by BennyST

You can do it, but just about no one does.

One of the biggest things in boxing is getting multiple titles in lots of divisions, and yet it's ten times easier than it has ever been....actually it's, WBC, WBA, IBF, WBO, Ring, Lineal, IBO, WBC Diamond....errr (is that it...I'm sure there are more which people now count as a title) eight times as likely to jump up and grab any old thing.

I always use this very, very simple example.

Paulie Malignaggi is considered a champion in today's boxing world/climate. Not long ago, he would never have been a titlist. He may have been lucky to get a title shot, but he couldn't beat Cotto or Hatton when he fought them, and at the time he did neither of those guys would have been the champ either. So, he probably would never have even had a title shot. Think about that and think about just how many titlists there are today just like that. There are so, so many.

Well, just lately, Pacquiao is a world champ again at 154. Which champion did he beat there? None. Which top ranked fighter did he beat there? None. Which former champion did he beat there? None. How did he become champion then? I don't know.

It's just a different title picture altogether. Today, winning titles in more divisions is not as impressive as cleaning out a division. To me, someone who unifies has achieved something that very, very few fighters in today's world do. Whereas, there are a million and one multi-division champions now.

You have to be a special fighter to clean out a division. Jumping about and making sure you have the right opponent in front of you to win another title in another division really isn't as difficult as it seems. Joan Guzman is already a three division champ and will probably move up alongside legends like Duran etc if he wins another as a four division champ, which won't surprise me. What's he actually done though? He's already sitting alongside guys like Julio Cesar Chavez, Alexis Arguello, etc. Great, talented fighter but what's he actually done? Well, he's a three time, three division world champion is what!

Eder Jofre beat ten times the talent and type of opponents over anyone I can think of today, and to me yes, that includes Pac. He's only a two division champ! My god! Only two divisions! He can't be as good as someone who has five titles in different weight divisions, or six, or eight! He's only got two!

Perfection, mate I've been wanting to say almost exactly that and couldn't put it better. I totally agree and it's a good plug for guys like Kostya Tszyu and especially the true greats like Benny Leonard, Joe Gans, Willie Pep and such.

[fitefanSHO]

"Dominating one weight class or winning titles in multiple, which is better?"

I know what Marvin Hagler would say about it.

[Walt Liquor]

nowadays, the weight class skippers are pretty much just beltgrabbers. that does absolutely nothing for me. to rule a weight class you have to fight all kinds of styles and competitiors, instead of picking and choosing. (even that rarely happens any more)

[fitefanSHO]

Originally Posted by Walt Liquor

nowadays, the weight class skippers are pretty much just beltgrabbers. that does absolutely nothing for me. to rule a weight class you have to fight all kinds of styles and competitiors, instead of picking and choosing. (even that rarely happens any more)

And you have to be dedicated to staying at that weight, no easy task as your body fills out and you want to eat like a normal human being.

The fact that fighters like Hagler and Micky Ward only fought in one weight class their whole careers is impressive to me in a way that winning alphabets straps every 4 pounds never would be.