Who is the linear HW champ now?

There is no linear heavyweight champ right now, simple as that. Someone has to unify first. If Maskaev fought Klitschko, I think the winner of that could be considered the best as I feel they are the top two right now, with Peter a close third.

You're right about the fact that the judgement should be withheld until we see him in action. Before Vitali retired though, I always thought that he is a much better fighter than Wlad. Yes, Wlad is faster and maybe a little better skilled. But I always thought that Vitali has a much more complete package: great chin, great heart, a very good defense, ability to use his size advantage to the fullest, etc., etc. As of today, you're right. Will you change your opinion if Vitali will show that his skills did not diminish? physically wlad is quicker,,better technically and hits harder with one punch,,,but vitali is much better mentally and that is huge in the fight game. vitali is a much smarter fighter and would never beat himself by throwing an obscene amount of punches per round and exhuast himself like wlad did twice and he's much calmer under pressure

People presumed Vitali was the best in the division but he never proved it, that’s why he never became lineal. He may have held Lewis’ last belt, but the WBC is no more credible than any of the other alphabet organizations.

Since Lewis retired with only the WBC belt, I guess you can say it was Vitali who was next since he fought for the WBC belt and won it, then retired and Rahman got it, then Maskaev beat Rahman. If anyone is, then it's Oleg, I guess.

Very good discussion going on here. I think Wladimir Klitschko is the number 1 guy right now. It will be interesting to see how Vitali does when he gets back. I think Vitali-Sam Peter would be a superfight after Vitali beats Maskaev wich is not an easy fight either..

Sure, and if Klitschko were WBC champ Hopkins would call him out.:ugh: u know he wouldnt call him out, hopkins would get smoked in the 1st round..

You're right about the fact that the judgement should be withheld until we see him in action. Before Vitali retired though, I always thought that he is a much better fighter than Wlad. Yes, Wlad is faster and maybe a little better skilled. But I always thought that Vitali has a much more complete package: great chin, great heart, a very good defense, ability to use his size advantage to the fullest, etc., etc. As of today, you're right. Will you change your opinion if Vitali will show that his skills did not diminish? Well, to be honestly, it will be a bit of a kunumdrum for me because I don't think Maskaev is all that good of a fighter and certainly doesn't compare with Bryd or Brock or Peter IMO. He was in the right place at the right time and beat the right man, Rahman, who I also feel was overrated. If Vitali destroys Maskaev, he'll be doing exactly what is expected of him; and I'd still have Wlad out in front. Now, if he follows that up by beating Briggs and lets say Wladimir beats Valuev...then we've got a damn tie. See, most people felt Wladimir was the better fighter until Sanders blitzed him....and then, that loss, IMO, led to his loss against Brewster. He tried too hard to knock Brewster out and ended up punching himself out. In the meantime, Vitali looks damn good against Lewis and damn near beats him and then destroys Kirk Johnson and the man who beat his brother, which made him the better of the two at that point. Vitali was #1, Byrd was #2, and Wlad was somewhere around #12 or 10 or so. Now, Wlad has comeback and beaten Peter, and got off the canvas to do it, beat Byrd in devastating fasion, and knocked Brock out near cold. Vitali, on the other hand, made one defense of his title against Danny Williams, who at that point, had beaten a shot Mike Tyson. So, competition is in Wladimir's favour at this point. We'll just have to wait and see. I just don't want to take away from Wladimir's accomplishments because his brother, who used to be the better fighter, is coming back. That's just not fair to Wladimir.

Wladimir Klitschko no1 else comes close to the claim. This is true.

At this stage, until we see Vitali in action, I would presume so. Wlad has grown under Steward while Vitali's been absent from the ring. And, to be truthful, Vital, outside of Kirk Johnson, earned his reputation on a loss, so it's only fair to give the nod to Wladimir until Vitali proves he's back and better. I'd say he's tougher and has a better chin....but Wlad's the better boxer...and has "beaten" better competition. You're right about the fact that the judgement should be withheld until we see him in action. Before Vitali retired though, I always thought that he is a much better fighter than Wlad. Yes, Wlad is faster and maybe a little better skilled. But I always thought that Vitali has a much more complete package: great chin, great heart, a very good defense, ability to use his size advantage to the fullest, etc., etc. As of today, you're right. Will you change your opinion if Vitali will show that his skills did not diminish?

Do you think Wlad is better than Vitali? At this stage, until we see Vitali in action, I would presume so. Wlad has grown under Steward while Vitali's been absent from the ring. And, to be truthful, Vital, outside of Kirk Johnson, earned his reputation on a loss, so it's only fair to give the nod to Wladimir until Vitali proves he's back and better. I'd say he's tougher and has a better chin....but Wlad's the better boxer...and has "beaten" better competition.

Lewis...if you want to get technical. None of the "titlists" have become the lineal champ, yet. Here's how they rank in importance: 1. Wladimir Klitschko.....as a Top 5 fighter, he beat long time IBF titlist and the best or second best fighter in the world in Chris Byrd and beat ranked contenders Sam Peter and Calvin Brock. 2. Oleg Maskaev.....as a lower tier contender, he beat a top 10 heavyweight in WBC Titlist Hasim Rahman. 3. Shannon Briggs...as a lower tier contender, he beat Liakhovich, who had beaten top ranked WBO Titlist Lamon Brewster. 4. Nicolay Valuev....as a lower tier contender, he beat WBA titlist John Ruiz, who had previoiusly lost to James Toney, prior to the illegal substance use allegations. 5. Vitali Klitschko...is WBC champion emeritus, which means he was the best in the world two years ago, along with Chris Byrd and should he beat Maskaev, he would rightfully be the second best in the world, next to his brother. To get a lineal champ: Wladimir Klitschko must face and defeat either Shannon Briggs or Oleg Maskaev; but preferably both, or their conquerors. Do you think Wlad is better than Vitali?

... Maskaev? Briggs? Wlad? Valuev? Lewis...if you want to get technical. None of the "titlists" have become the lineal champ, yet. Here's how they rank in importance: 1. Wladimir Klitschko.....as a Top 5 fighter, he beat long time IBF titlist and the best or second best fighter in the world in Chris Byrd and beat ranked contenders Sam Peter and Calvin Brock. 2. Oleg Maskaev.....as a lower tier contender, he beat a top 10 heavyweight in WBC Titlist Hasim Rahman. 3. Shannon Briggs...as a lower tier contender, he beat Liakhovich, who had beaten top ranked WBO Titlist Lamon Brewster. 4. Nicolay Valuev....as a lower tier contender, he beat WBA titlist John Ruiz, who had previoiusly lost to James Toney, prior to the illegal substance use allegations. 5. Vitali Klitschko...is WBC champion emeritus, which means he was the best in the world two years ago, along with Chris Byrd and should he beat Maskaev, he would rightfully be the second best in the world, next to his brother. To get a lineal champ: Wladimir Klitschko must face and defeat either Shannon Briggs or Oleg Maskaev; but preferably both, or their conquerors.

wlad is the best but the lineal heavywieght champion is lennox lewis. until somebody unifiys they cant lay a claim to the vacant ring title (which is to show your the lineal champ)

if you go by the "beat the man who beat the man" theory, which i think is stupid, here it is... tyson unifies belts, so we start w/him: tyson>douglas>holy>bowe>holy>moorer>foreman>briggs(lol, thats crap)>lewis>rahman>lewis lewis retires, so it goes back to the last man to beat him, rahman who then loses to holy, who loses to byrd, who loses to wlad... so that makes wlad the champ going by the "beat the man rule" that makes briggs a linear champ... it turns out the theory you think is stupid, is the most followed, because it is the only one which resembles what would happen if there was no alphabet soup fyi tyson' s unification does not matter much, what matter is him beating spinks m.spinks holmes ali l.spinks ali foreman frazier ali liston patterson patterson unified in a tournament of HW after marciano retired

Briggs is the Man This is not my opinion but an argument can be made for Briggs as being the lineal champion(again) Because Brewster beat Klitschko in a sort of before the fact unification match. Lyakovich then beat Brewster and lost to Briggs. Simple right? Please feel free to discuss and disagree

Klitschko Is The Ibf.... The Wbc Which Is The Real Champ Which Dates Back As The First Belt Is Maskeav Isn't the WBA older? And technically Lewis is still the Linear champ and he will remain so until someone beats him or until someone unifies the belts. Wlad is the closest thing we've got at the moment, we'll have to see what he and his brother do next...

Sure, and if Klitschko were WBC champ Hopkins would call him out.:ugh: more likely then if he was the IBF

I would say that noone is the linear champ at the moment, the title is vacant. Although I believe Wlad is the best of the bunch, he needs at least two of the belts before he can make that claim.

maskeav is the wbc champ thats why hopkins wanted to fight him Sure, and if Klitschko were WBC champ Hopkins would call him out.:ugh:

if you go by the "beat the man who beat the man" theory, which i think is stupid, here it is... tyson unifies belts, so we start w/him: tyson>douglas>holy>bowe>holy>moorer>foreman>briggs(lol, thats crap)>lewis>rahman>lewis lewis retires, so it goes back to the last man to beat him, rahman who then loses to holy, who loses to byrd, who loses to wlad... so that makes wlad the champ going by the "beat the man rule" that makes briggs a linear champ...