Manny Paquiao -Ring Magazine Title ???

All that article says, that the WBC is equivalent or "parallel" to a Lineal Championship. Thats so far from being correct. The Ring Title was on the line when he fought Sasakul . No it wasn't but you're conflating Ring titles and lineage which is an honest mistake as they are often the same. Ring stopped tracking lineage in the late 80s but lineage didn't stop. The line from Canto continued, still continues today in fact in Naito. Pacquiao was in that line.

Pac has 4 lineal belts not 4 ring mag belts.

I know its all just meaningless statistics anyway, but I hardly think its fair to say 'we think the WBC is magically equivilant to the lineal title now, despite the fact that the WBA is older than it and the IBF has now gained legitimacy as well' Mark Johnson was not only a far better fighter than Sasakul(assuming you know the rest of his career), but higher rated than Sasakul at the time. I mean, I thoguht the importance of the 'lineal' title was that the guy in question had either beaten 'the man' at that weight or had earned his status as the best by beating the #1 or #2 guy. (which neither Arbachakov nor Sasakul did) and the Ring readopted their policy in 2001 I believe. Mark Johnson vacated the flyweight division 8 months BEFORE pacquiao fought Sasakul.....that is why Sasakul was the Lineal champ.....

I know its all just meaningless statistics anyway, but I hardly think its fair to say 'we think the WBC is magically equivilant to the lineal title now, despite the fact that the WBA is older than it and the IBF has now gained legitimacy as well' Mark Johnson was not only a far better fighter than Sasakul(assuming you know the rest of his career), but higher rated than Sasakul at the time. I mean, I thoguht the importance of the 'lineal' title was that the guy in question had either beaten 'the man' at that weight or had earned his status as the best by beating the #1 or #2 guy. (which neither Arbachakov nor Sasakul did) and the Ring readopted their policy in 2001 I believe.

I read on ESPN and on this forum that that Manny Pacquiao is 4 time Ring Magazine Champ. I thought Manny is only a 3 time Ring Magazine Champ. Who is the fourth? Marco Antonio Barrera 2003 Juan Manuel Marquez 2007 Ricky Hatton 2009 I think people were referring to the record 4 lineal titles of Pacquiao, which are the basis of Ring titles. Ring titles were not issued, suspended for a time, but lineal titles existed without it. (at flyweight that time)

All that article says, that the WBC is equivalent or "parallel" to a Lineal Championship. Thats so far from being correct. The Ring Title was on the line when he fought Sasakul . There was no Ring Title in 1998. They re-did their policy in 2002 (or 2001, can't remember).

ring was vacant at time i believe...so the next way to win a lineal title is for #1 & #2 to box-off...which they did. I understand the concept, but Sasakul was coming off of an upset win over Yuri Arbachakov(who was #2 at the time), and I seriously doubt Pacquiao was the #2 or #3 at the time, seeing as he had no wins over top ten guys at that time. Ill admit I could be wrong, but it just doesnt add up. Pacquiao may have been the #1 guy in the division at the time, but he didnt fulfill the requirements to be the 'ring magazine lineal champion'. someone should have had to fight Mark Johnson)the #1 in the division) to become the lineal champion under those conditions, and Johnson didnt move up to super flyweight until 1999.

All that article says, that the WBC is equivalent or "parallel" to a Lineal Championship. Thats so far from being correct. The Ring Title was on the line when he fought Sasakul . thanks for agreeing...the author is a Ring contributor

All that article says, that the WBC is equivalent or "parallel" to a Lineal Championship. Thats so far from being correct. The Ring Title was on the line when he fought Sasakul . Sasakul was the considered the man at flyweight at the time, that simple.

All that article says, that the WBC is equivalent or "parallel" to a Lineal Championship. Thats so far from being correct. The Ring Title was on the line when he fought Sasakul .

Look it up, I cant find that anywhere.

The Ring didn't have their belts and poilcy in the late 90s. They stopped doing it in the late 80s/early 90s and re-did it in 2002

myth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Ring_world_champions http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine%27s_Annual_Ratings:_Flyweight--1990s notice that at the end of 1998, Pacquiao was not the Ring Champion. Sasakul and Pacquiao fought in 1998. just read this link: http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=18886 if you dont believe a Ring contributor, then its fine... you can even say Pacquiao is a 1 lineal champion if that is what you believe

ring was vacant at time i believe...so the next way to win a lineal title is for #1 & #2 to box-off...which they did.

They fought for WBC not Ring

Chatchai Sasakul, I dont think so...

Flyweight: Chatchai Sasakul myth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Ring_world_champions http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine%27s_Annual_Ratings:_Flyweight--1990s notice that at the end of 1998, Pacquiao was not the Ring Champion. Sasakul and Pacquiao fought in 1998.

Flyweight: Chatchai Sasakul Yep, just as i was about to type it in. 1998.

I read on ESPN and on this forum that that Manny Pacquiao is 4 time Ring Magazine Champ. I thought Manny is only a 3 time Ring Magazine Champ. Who is the fourth? Marco Antonio Barrera 2003 Juan Manuel Marquez 2007 Ricky Hatton 2009 Flyweight: Chatchai Sasakul

he isnt. its just a silly myth hes only been 'lineal' in 3 divisions