But they werent. Cotto was no1, Williams was no2 and Margarito was no3 when Cotto fought Margarito.
Williams was signed to fight at 154 when Cotto-Margarito happened.
I believe thats why the majority saw Cotto-Margarito for the Lineage as the winner of the fight would be #1 and the loser of the fight would be #2. So in theory it was the #1 Vs. #2 because after the fight was done, Williams wouldn't be ranked at 147. If Williams date was swaped with the Cotto-Margarito fight (2 months within each other) It would have been the #1 Vs. #2.
didn't berto win the wbc that was vacated by floyd? and cotto did the same thing--he fought for a vacant title didn't he?Why don't you make you're own thread about your beloved floyd being the undisputed WW champ? :D
floyd is in hindsight--mosley was, but he lost to floyd, but floyd didn't pay sanctioning fees so the title wasn't up for grabs--but floyd is the ww champion because of lineage---
Among the alphabets, its WBA, WBC, and throw in the ring that matters. Obviously, there is no unified holder. And what with all these arguments for or against, it is obvious that there is an ongoing DISPUTE, so there is obviously NO undisputed champion. The question is: is he undisputed. He is not. He can be, if he cleans up the division, but at present, he is not.
No, you can be unified if you hold 2 belts. Undisputed is all 4. Lineal is the man who beat the man.
Pac and Floyd are none of these things.
ok that make sense:boxing:
That's unified and not undisputed..
No, you can be unified if you hold 2 belts. Undisputed is all 4. Lineal is the man who beat the man.
Pac and Floyd are none of these things.
Belts are scattered no Undisputed Champion at Welterweight atm
Lineal :
Floyd Was lineal after beating Baldomir. Mosley has claim on being Lineal so we can say
Floyd is the Lineal champion......but... he's on vacation.
Undisputed is not the same as lineal. You can be lineal champ without being undisputed. Undisputed is when you hold all the belts i.e Hopkins at 160.
Although, its highly unlikely we'll get many undisputed champions these days with sanctioning bodies constantly stripping people of belts for no good reason.
That's unified and not undisputed..
Undisputed is not the same as lineal. You can be lineal champ without being undisputed. Undisputed is when you hold all the belts i.e Hopkins at 160.
Although, its highly unlikely we'll get many undisputed champions these days with sanctioning bodies constantly stripping people of belts for no good reason.
Yeah, correct me if I'm wrong , I think bhop was the last undisputed champ at this point in time.
Undisputed is synonymous to being the lineal champ.. To become the champ you have to beat the champ in that division.. But in cases there is no champ, the #1 and #2 ranked fighters needs to fight to become the undisputed Champ.. So in this case Pac needs to fight May because both of them are ranked 1 and 2 in that division..Undisputed is different from lineal champ and you're second sentence refers to the ringmag champ. The ringmag made an exception to pac when he was the #1 WW ranked fighter, he could fight the #2(mayweather) or #3(mosley) to become the ringmag WW champ but he was replaced as the #1 ranked fighter by mayweather when floyd beat JMM and I don't know if that rule still stands now tha pac is the #1 ranked WW fighter again.
Undisputed is synonymous to being the lineal champ.. To become the champ you have to beat the champ in that division.. But in cases there is no champ, the #1 and #2 ranked fighters needs to fight to become the undisputed Champ.. So in this case Pac needs to fight May because both of them are ranked 1 and 2 in that division..
Undisputed is not the same as lineal. You can be lineal champ without being undisputed. Undisputed is when you hold all the belts i.e Hopkins at 160.
Although, its highly unlikely we'll get many undisputed champions these days with sanctioning bodies constantly stripping people of belts for no good reason.
Yes unified but not necessarily undisputed. However, if you're the undisputed champ then you are also a unified champ because you unified all the belts
Undisputed is synonymous to being the lineal champ.. To become the champ you have to beat the champ in that division.. But in cases there is no champ, the #1 and #2 ranked fighters needs to fight to become the undisputed Champ.. So in this case Pac needs to fight May because both of them are ranked 1 and 2 in that division..
That makes him a unified WW champ..Being undisputed and unified are linked but sometimes they are not..
I mean he can be a unified champ by fighting the belt holders and unifying the titles but it doesnt make him the undisputed WW champ because there is still May..
If he only beats May and Berto, then that makes him undisputed but not the unified WW champ..
In any case, I rather have Pac become the undisputed WW champ rather than the unified WW champ..Yes unified but not necessarily undisputed. However, if you're the undisputed champ then you are also a unified champ because you unified all the belts
But there's still be some welterweight title holder to dispute his being a welterweight champ. Now, he beats all of them WW title holders then he would be the undisputed WW champ.
That makes him a unified WW champ..Being undisputed and unified are linked but sometimes they are not..
I mean he can be a unified champ by fighting the belt holders and unifying the titles but it doesnt make him the undisputed WW champ because there is still May..
If he only beats May and Berto, then that makes him undisputed but not the unified WW champ..
In any case, I rather have Pac become the undisputed WW champ rather than the unified WW champ..