Which heavyweight title lineage do you consider the most prestigious?

The WBA stripped Ali for giving Sonny Liston a rematch. The WBC didn't. The WBA stripped Ali *again* for not going to Vietnam and they stripped him very quickly. The WBC waited much longer to strip him and only stripped him because it was becoming clear he'd be unable to get a boxing license. They were far more fair to Ali in both instances than the WBA was. In the first instance, WBC champion Ali dominated WBA champion Terrell to re-unify the title. Adding to the WBC's credibility. In the second instance, WBC champion Frazier dominated WBA champion Ellis to unify the title. Adding to the WBC's credibility. WBC heavyweight champions are undefeated in unification fights. Over and over, when given the chance, the WBC champion has proven superior to the others. Thus far, the boxing world has refused to recognize the Franchise title as a world championship. The "Franchise champion" can't lose the title in the ring. So how can it be a world title? If you beat the Franchise champion, you become the diamond champion, not the world champion, and the Franchise champion remains Franchise champion despite the loss. Interesting that the WBA would have a problem with Ali giving Liston a rematch.

The Lineal I will make my case for the Lineal. the lineal is covered with warts... Did this guy retire? who sanctions it? what are the rules for abiding by the lineal in an institutionalized format of one sort or another? It is not perfect by any stretch. Its also easy to abuse the lineal, and make claim to it, a real weakness IMO. I mean If I declare myself the lineal champ right now, who has the authority as an agent for boxing, to say I am not? Yet the lineal is a work of human achievement. One not to be shanked away by some middle man, some agency of the government that does not have "the best" as their stated goal. It is ingenious and is designed so that the title can always be worked out eventually. It is elegant in what it seeks to memoralize...the man who beat the man is the man. So simple, so matter of fact, and such an appeal to the people who follow the sport... Simple, elegant and effective. Isn't that what we want as our champ? The best? with no caveats? The toughest MF? When Marciano walked into a bar and declared he could not dance and could not out drink anyone, but could lick any man in the bar...This is the lineal mindset. And this mindset goes across any culture. the same immortal pronouncement could be uttered in a Russian, a Mexican, an Irish, and any bar in the world. When the ancient Greek fighters beat their rivals...when the English fighters won it all... when John L, Irish to the bone, and American to the bone as well... emerged victorious they all had a thought folks: It was not "I am the wbs ghs ftu ghe rty sanctioned champ"... It was not "I am the toughest Irishman, Afro American in the world" NO no no...It was, I am the toughest MF in the world, no man on this ball o' Earth can lick me. Now I am not saying that there were not issues with this process of the lineal. There have always been fights about how the championship transfers, what line carries the championship, and other such issues of legitimacy. BUT at the end of the day the simple truth is, was and always will be that to resolve these issues is as simple as it was to resolve who the toughest kid in the neighborhood school yard was: Lace em up and see who wins. The lineal has a mechanism so that it can always come home to roost. It connects the fan to the world at large. I like a system that is simple, egalitarian and true to the process at hand, hence I am a sucker for the lineal.

Ring Belt 1st, then Undisputed. End/

Boy, this thread failed.

I sincerely and genuinely hope this perspective doesn't change when Wilder relinquishes / loses the WBC strap. I have been fooled by your rhetoric prior. I am convinced this cannot all be one giant attempt to coerce people into thinking "Wilder is the best" As it stands, 1 individual belt has very little relation to who is the best champion. A very recent and quick example of this is Tyson Fury currently holding 0 belts but widely accepted as the best HW in the division since he won more rounds against Wilder, the only other undefeated fighter in the division. (full disclosure, I actually scored the fight a draw, but the general conses seems to be that Fury won the fight) Well I agree entirely and so destroys the credibility of the current "world champion" because they are no longer the best fighter in the belts own rankings. This of course inturn lowers the credibility of the belt itself, since it's now being held by a non champion. :lol1: Really? Funny thing is that's pretty much exactly what I'm taking from this thread made by this poster. I don't dislike the WBC dude, but his agenda is almost always embarassingly transparent. That said it is still a genuine and worthwhile discussion so I ain't really gonna take issue with it. What I would say is that the quality if the historical lineage does not necesarily correlate to the quality of any given champion at any particular moment in time however, so as an argument to bolster the legitimacy of this or that titlist it ain't very useful, but as a general debate in it's own right it's not without interest.

IBF is the prettiest one

I sincerely and genuinely hope this perspective doesn't change when Wilder relinquishes / loses the WBC strap. I have been fooled by your rhetoric prior. I am convinced this cannot all be one giant attempt to coerce people into thinking "Wilder is the best" Wilder isn't going to vacate. He may lose. If he loses to the better man, it doesn't harm the prestige of the WBC title. The WBC heavyweight title has clearly been the most prestigious heavyweight title of my lifetime (I was born in '83), with or without Wilder. Wilder holding the title for five years hasn't hurt though. In that time, the other three belts have all been stripped or vacated. Tyson Fury currently holding 0 belts but widely accepted as the best HW in the division ESPN has Deontay Wilder rated higher than Tyson Fury. Boxrec has Deontay Wilder rated higher than Tyson Fury. TBRB has Deontay Wilder rated higher than Tyson Fury.

... These days, "lineality" looks more "poetic" than "factual"...

The Ring split with the lineal title years prior to that and you know it. But Ring also strips you for retiring. Yet they didn't strip Fury for writing "the end." So clearly they didn't consider that a retirement announcement. the TBRB and CBZ are the two biggest authorities on the lineal title and both of them consider the heavyweight title vacant. No, the public is the biggest authority on the lineal title and the public considers Fury the lineal champion. That's the whole point of the lineal title. Nobody controls it except for the public. Whether you consider Fury lineal champion or not, he has the Klitschko lineage. If you want to break the lineage, go ahead, but Fury is still active and fighting and defending Wladimir's scalp.

WBC heavyweight champions are undefeated in unification fights. Over and over, when given the chance, the WBC champion has proven superior to the others. I sincerely and genuinely hope this perspective doesn't change when Wilder relinquishes / loses the WBC strap. I have been fooled by your rhetoric prior. I am convinced this cannot all be one giant attempt to coerce people into thinking "Wilder is the best" As it stands, 1 individual belt has very little relation to who is the best champion. A very recent and quick example of this is Tyson Fury currently holding 0 belts but widely accepted as the best HW in the division since he won more rounds against Wilder, the only other undefeated fighter in the division. (full disclosure, I actually scored the fight a draw, but the general conses seems to be that Fury won the fight) Thus far, the boxing world has refused to recognize the Franchise title as a world championship. The "Franchise champion" can't lose the title in the ring. So how can it be a world title? If you beat the Franchise champion, you become the diamond champion, not the world champion, and the Franchise champion remains Franchise champion despite the loss. Well I agree entirely and so destroys the credibility of the current "world champion" because they are no longer the best fighter in the belts own rankings. This of course inturn lowers the credibility of the belt itself, since it's now being held by a non champion.

You linked to an article speculating that Fury was retiring. Fury didn't actually say he was retiring. He said: "Thanks to all the fans that supported & believed in me along the way. Hope you enjoy it as much as I did. The end." The end of what? The end of his tweet? The end of his life? The end of his career? Is he threatening retirement or is he threatening suicide? Or is he simply saying "the end" as in the end of his statement? If that was your justification for stripping him, good for you, but most disagree with you and still recognize him as lineal champion. Ring Magazine didn't strip him until 7 months after the tweet you linked to. So clearly they didn't consider him retired based on that tweet. The Ring split with the lineal title years prior to that and you know it. the TBRB and CBZ are the two biggest authorities on the lineal title and both of them consider the heavyweight title vacant.

This was the second of at least three times, maybe more, and it includes a reference to the time you refer to: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/jul/26/tyson-fury-retires-boxing-again You linked to an article speculating that Fury was retiring. Fury didn't actually say he was retiring. He said: "Thanks to all the fans that supported & believed in me along the way. Hope you enjoy it as much as I did. The end." The end of what? The end of his tweet? The end of his life? The end of his career? Is he threatening retirement or is he threatening suicide? Or is he simply saying "the end" as in the end of his statement? If that was your justification for stripping him, good for you, but most disagree with you and still recognize him as lineal champion. Ring Magazine didn't strip him until 7 months after the tweet you linked to. So clearly they didn't consider him retired based on that tweet.

Link please? This was the second of at least three times, maybe more, and it includes a reference to the time you refer to: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/jul/26/tyson-fury-retires-boxing-again

He retired at least 3 times via social media and it took months to retract one of them. Link please?

Hours after publicly declaring his retirement, he said it was a prank and he wasn't retiring. If that's your justification for stripping him, you might need a sense of humor. He retired at least 3 times via social media and it took months to retract one of them.

Fury publicly declared his retirement multiple times. That vacates the lineal title. Hours after publicly declaring his retirement, he said it was a prank and he wasn't retiring. If that's your justification for stripping him, you might need a sense of humor.

For those that recognize the lineal title, most seem to consider Fury the champion. So it may be vacant in your opinion, but most seem to disagree. There were other lineal heavyweight champions with longer hiatuses than Fury had and they never had their lineal status taken away. Fury publicly declared his retirement multiple times. That vacates the lineal title. Just like how Pacquiao vacated the lineal welterweight title upon retirement, even though he returned to the ring mere months later. Otherwise, Bud Crawford would be considered lineal welterweight champion and nobody considers him that. Because Horn beat Pacquiao, who won the vacant lineal welterweight title against Tim Bradley and then retired. But in the same calendar year he returned, beat Jesse Vargas, then lost (by robbery, but that's beside the point) to Horn. And then Crawford beat Horn. But because Pacquiao retired, nobody considered him lineal champion when he lost to Horn. And thus Horn, and Crawford, were never lineal champion. The TBRB and CBZ both consider the lineal heavyweight title to be vacant. The only ones who still consider Fury lineal champion are people involved with the promotion of his fights.

The lineal title is the only one that matters and it is presently vacant. For those that recognize the lineal title, most seem to consider Fury the champion. So it may be vacant in your opinion, but most seem to disagree. There were other lineal heavyweight champions with longer hiatuses than Fury had and they never had their lineal status taken away.

Either that black belt or that green one

Well I thought he was stripped because he refused to enlist in the war? He would have been stripped of every belt, that isn't a WBA thing is it? (please correct me if i'm wrong) The WBA stripped Ali for giving Sonny Liston a rematch. The WBC didn't. The WBA stripped Ali *again* for not going to Vietnam and they stripped him very quickly. The WBC waited much longer to strip him and only stripped him because it was becoming clear he'd be unable to get a boxing license. They were far more fair to Ali in both instances than the WBA was. In the first instance, WBC champion Ali dominated WBA champion Terrell to re-unify the title. Adding to the WBC's credibility. In the second instance, WBC champion Frazier dominated WBA champion Ellis to unify the title. Adding to the WBC's credibility. WBC heavyweight champions are undefeated in unification fights. Over and over, when given the chance, the WBC champion has proven superior to the others. Ahhhh, I hope you edit this list if and when WBC make Wilder Franchise :D Thus far, the boxing world has refused to recognize the Franchise title as a world championship. The "Franchise champion" can't lose the title in the ring. So how can it be a world title? If you beat the Franchise champion, you become the diamond champion, not the world champion, and the Franchise champion remains Franchise champion despite the loss.