Were Dariusz Michalczewski and Joe Calzaghe undisputed champions, or not?

You ever seen him fight? of course i have, why would i ask if i haven't myself. i see a guy who can throw good combos, has every punch in his arsenal, and is damn hard to hit. i'm not saying he's the number one ww, but to say he can't compete just sounds to me like you haven't watched him. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bxXkT6BdfE&feature=related

Did he? I think you're confusing him with Graciano Rochigianni. yah rochigianni nearly had the wbc go bust dint he

Did he? I think you're confusing him with Graciano Rochigianni. :pat: My bad. I am........ Guess I need some sleep....

DM won a trial regarding him being unfairly stripped of a belt. I know you remember the details. can you tell me which organization it was and why they had the trial? Did he? I think you're confusing him with Graciano Rochigianni.

all the attributes to be a potential banana skin then He would've been tough, tough, tough for Dariusz. Not sure why Michalchewski was content with the WBO but to each their own (hey, Nicky Piper). It's not like Jones leaped in and swept away all the belts or something. Roy won the WBC, then lost it, then regained it, then took a year off, then fought a non-title fight...all that before unifying against Del Valle.

He never had the WBC belt. Michalchewski was aware of the circumstances prior to his bout with Hill. I believe Del Valle was his mandatory for one belt and the overhyped William Guthrie for the other. DM won a trial regarding him being unfairly stripped of a belt. I know you remember the details. can you tell me which organization it was and why they had the trial?

Was he stripped because he didn't want to fight del valle? And was that why WBC stripped him? No, he was stripped by the IBF because he didn't want to fight mandatory William Guthrie. The WBA stripped him because they wanted him to drop the WBO belt, an organization they didn't recognize at the time, and Dariusz said no.

Good, not great. Like I said, he lost a disputed split decision to Hill in Hill's hometown before Hill went on to beat Maske. Dropped Hill AND Roy Jones. Very tough southpaw with decent pop (obviously) and a cast-iron chin. Tall, good reach, decent skills. One-time champ. Just a tough customer. all the attributes to be a potential banana skin then

was the del valle ne good Good, not great. Like I said, he lost a disputed split decision to Hill in Hill's hometown before Hill went on to beat Maske. Dropped Hill AND Roy Jones. Very tough southpaw with decent pop (obviously) and a cast-iron chin. Tall, good reach, decent skills. One-time champ. Just a tough customer.

Was he stripped because he didn't want to fight del valle? And was that why WBC stripped him? He never had the WBC belt. Michalchewski was aware of the circumstances prior to his bout with Hill. I believe Del Valle was his mandatory for one belt and the overhyped William Guthrie for the other.

I hear you. He was given the option to defend against Del Valle. He chose not to. was the del valle ne good

I hear you. He was given the option to defend against Del Valle. He chose not to. Was he stripped because he didn't want to fight del valle? And was that why WBC stripped him?

He was stripped of the belts. One of them was because two of the santioning bodies didnt want their belts together. I hear you. He was given the option to defend against Del Valle. He chose not to.

That's probably because he was willing to fight the opponents that Dariusz wasn't. Right before Dariusz fought Hill, Hill had won a controversial decision over Del Valle in a fight that saw Hill get dropped. But his hometown judges gave him the gift. Del Valle would've been Dariusz's mandatory had he kept those titles but he dropped them in favor of defending against WBO mandatory Nicky Piper. He was stripped of the belts. One of them was because two of the santioning bodies didnt want their belts together.

He would have had it had Mormeck not been stripped. To answer the thread. Calzaghe also would've had all 4 belts if he'd not been stripped of the IBF belt. I think that was because he didnt fight the mandatory, Steiglitz (i think). Dariusz held 3 belts. I think Roy basically got handed the other one and then picked up 2 of Dariusz's when he got stripped. And somehow got called Ring Champ without beating Dariusz... That's probably because he was willing to fight the opponents that Dariusz wasn't. Right before Dariusz fought Hill, Hill had won a controversial decision over Del Valle in a fight that saw Hill get dropped. But his hometown judges gave him the gift. Del Valle would've been Dariusz's mandatory had he kept those titles but he dropped them in favor of defending against WBO mandatory Nicky Piper.

Nope. He never got the IBF belt that Cunningham had. He would have had it had Mormeck not been stripped. To answer the thread. Calzaghe also would've had all 4 belts if he'd not been stripped of the IBF belt. I think that was because he didnt fight the mandatory, Steiglitz (i think). Dariusz held 3 belts. I think Roy basically got handed the other one and then picked up 2 of Dariusz's when he got stripped. And somehow got called Ring Champ without beating Dariusz...

i also believe in this day and age having all four belts is impossible (its no fluke that only 1 person as managed this in history) so beating the concesus top ranked fighters is far more credible to your claim as undistputed champ rather then beating a low top ten rank fighter who just happens to be a titlist

cunningham was champion for 6 months at the time haye beat mormeck but had never defended hes belt. mormeck was the wbc/wba champion wernt he and traded 2 fights with then ibf champ oniel bell mormeck walked away with the 3 titles and haye beat him for 2 (shud of been 3) and added the wbo in hes first defence

but that ibf belt was a paper title after mormeck got stripped or was it bell but anyway by definition of to be the man you gotta beat the man haye was undistputed at cruiser plus he added a third title to hes claim been the man is not a birth right At this day and age you have to have the WBA, WBC, IBF and WBO belts simultaneously to be called undisputed. These are the major alphabetbelts. Cunningham had been champion for some time before Haye fought Mormeck as I recall.

There were no four belts back then. I think we're forgetting the times. The WBO was a nothing belt. He had the WBA and the IBF then dropped both for a belt that was the equivalent of the WBF (back then). But I actually think the "unification starting a new lineage" is not a bad idea at all. It would've been nice if he defended it against the consensus #1 contender in Del Valle though. i understand the wbo been very lightly regarded in them terms hell its still lightly regarded now in some circles but even by dismissing the wbo you still get 2 thirds of the division on 1 fighter its like owning 2/3s of a business but the person with only 1/3 gets the decisive vote in board meetings. the lineage does not always get passed over in fights does it so in them circumstances i do believe the fighter who steps up and wants to take the risks needed to be classified as the new lineal champ is as good as beating the man