How Important are Number of Title Defenses Legacy Wise?

To lesser known fighters, does that make their legacy? Extra Push to get into the HOF for some of the fighters? Examples Virgil Hill 10 Straight Title Defenses WBA LIGHT HEAVYWEIGH Julio Cesar Vasquez 10 Straight Title Defenses WBA MIDDLEWEIGHT Myung-Woo Yuh 19 Straight Title Defenses WBA LIGHT FLYWEIGHT Johnny Tapia 13 Straight Title Defenses WBO SUPER FLYWEIGHT Artur Grigorian 17 Title Defenses WBO LIGHTWEIGHT Dariusz Michalczewski 22 Straight Title Defenses WBO LIGHT HEAVYWEIGHT Johnny Nelson 13 straight Title Defenses WBO CRUISERWEIGHT Jung Koo Chang 15 Straight Title Defenses WBC LIGHT FLYWEIGHT Pongsaklek Wonjongkam 17 Straight Title Defenses WBC FLYWEIGHT Veeraphol Sahaprom 14 Straight Title Defenses WBC BATAMWEIGHT Oscar Larios 11 Straight Title Defenses WBC SUPER BANTAMWEIGHT Ratanapol Sor Vorapin 19 Straight Title Defenses IBF MINIMUMWEIGHT TITLE Orlando Canizales 16 Straight Title Defenses(UNDERRATED!) IBF BANTAMWEIGHT Vuyani Bungu 13 Straight title Defenses IBF SUPER BANTAMWEIGHT Sven Ottke 21 Straight Title Defenses IBF SUPER MIDDLEWEIGHT Henry Maske 10 Straight Title Defenses IBF LIGHT HEAVYWEIGHT To me its a hueg accomplishment to make double digit Title defenses. Does that help the legacy of smaller fighters and lesser known guys? Any of these guys elite level fighters?

Comments (5)

Jim_Jeffries

I think Dariuz Michalczewski was elite. Especially considering that he won 20 of those defenses by knockout, and had wins over guys like Virgil Hill (UD) and Montell Griffin (TKO). If only Roy Jones had fought him.

18y ago

abadger

As I've posted before, boxing is about fighting for and winning titles. Show me the boxer who never wanted to win a world title strap. How well a champ defends his title is the measurement of how good a champion he is. The more times he defends then the better he is. In this world of multiple belts and bodies the purity of this notion has been devalued a bit, with champs now prepared to vacate when they want to move on to bigger and better things, but those bigger and better things are almost always a bigger and better title. Any champ, almost regardless of the belt he holds has something that all the contenders in his division want to get their hands on. His title provides the impetus for those contenders to challenge him. his ability to stand up to that challenge to a large extent how good he is. If the champ ducks the best challengers, then the number of defences he manages is devalued, but if he does not then his defences are basically what defines his career. So yes, of course number of defences matters, but really its not "number of defences", thats just a code, what we are really talking about is "number of boxers beaten", and I can't think of any other way for a boxer to prove himself other than by doing exactly that.

18y ago

rusticraver

depends how suited your body is to moving up the weights in termsof legacy

18y ago

Stickman

Like Fishbone said, too many sanctioning bodies, too many titles, too much bullshit to slice through. The number if title defenses isn't as important. However, the length of time a title or titles are held can be at least meaningful, if very extended. Calzaghe, for example. What is it, 15 years he's held a title? And still undefeated, with nothing terribly worrisome on the horizon, he may end up being one of the few who retired undefeated and stayed that way. So far there's Marciano, can't remember if there's another or not. Anyone?

18y ago

Fi5hbone

Back in tha day the # of title defenses a fighter had was very important as far as determining legacy...Nowadays with all the alphabet sanctioning bodies the number of title defenses a fighter has holds considerably less significance...

18y ago