The Greatness of Joe Frazier and an example of when the lineal was needed and came to the rescue of boxing

[billeau2]

Okay, as in genuine and not smartassed

Because of the who involved I'm going to make more effort to see through your eyes here.



On the debate itself I have noticed a tendency for all involved to combat or counterpoint ideas with happenings.

For example just above we have Kaf asking in earnest if lineal alone is enough to pull eyes.

To answer we're told about the single most popular boxer alive.

You can see my dilemma. I don't think I need to explain none of that interaction answers anything for the third party reader.




I can not help but notice my own confirmation bias too. I have expressed some level of telling where I plan to go with lineal when speaking sashes and a little bit to RnT. To see PPV among the nods from a lineal proponent ... right track then ain't it? I struggle after the sash to find lineal.



I believe I may be the only member who honestly give no ****s beyond the history being correct. So I am trying to lean into that value. There is plenty of truth to Kaf's stance of it being made up bull****. I'm going to hand you something; pound for pound is not just made up bull**** from a promoter post dated to fit fighters who never heard of any p4p champion status in their lifetime let alone careers.

If I make a case for Tommy Burns as p4p again I'll get plenty about Tommy but little to nothing against p4p. So much so, p4p proponents are secure enough in p4p to read me explain exactly where it came from and what it is for.

No arguments from those who say p4p is this or that, because in p4p what p4p is, is secondary to who p4p is.

Lineal has lost this touch, this debate and all like it are proof.

p4p enjoys various takes on what p4p is or should be with little argument as to the idea itself. I never put HWs on p4p. I say i don't think HWs belong and everyone respects that.

Kafkod speaks to p4p from time to time with no need to explain it's an idea. Not a real title with real history. A post dated idea applied to history. It is very much just that. Just as much as lineal.



So, question to youse all, has lineal lost this touch because men like Kaf and myself refuse to acknowledge all the competing definitions? For my part, no, not at all, I define my p4p and people respect that rather than attack me. If I define lineal I will be attacked by men who have no business disrespecting my works. My works get attacked themselves and I do not mean my opinions.

If you want to know the mechanism that turns away I'll tell you directly:

Should Kaf drop the debate and I sit around just going "true" "untrue" then you lot will implode on yourselves and have internal debate about the defines of lineal or lineage.

This is the nexus in which most of us were thrust when Fury made claim.

I was independently and years prior working the champs. Fury runs his mouth, now dudes like ****ing Sid-Knee, Redeemer, Daggum, etc. experts.

Everyone was the lineal expert to the point my first threads on lineal are title **** like "Lineal by someone who actually know some history"

Of them who really knew TF they were talking and who was just repeating what sounded good to them or made sense to them?



I have explained traditions. No one cares. Not lineal.

I have explained promotions. No one cares, that is not lineal.

I will have a go at market expression but I won't be shocked when it does not end the debate but rather adds a new and true element.







Truths:
There is always a single best
Lineal was invented to sell fights
Markets are dictated by consumers.



I don't feel like anyone's changed that.

Not a question of the arguments... Accepted. But Proof has been presented! Lots of it! You may disagree with the proof, that is fine. I am not actually trying to convince other than where the facts take me. The fact is there is all kinds of precedent for the lineal. So if it has been made up, then it certainly took from things that existed. If you and Kafkod think this means nothing, thats fine, Notice I have never asked either of you to prove a negative: "Prove that the lineal does not exist" type amateur reasoning mistake (Proving a negative cannot be done)... But the best one can do countering the lineal is to either question the proof, or just maintain that the lineal is a great fabrication of ideas that preexisted...

I think you are smarter than to make such an argument but will respect it either way.

[billeau2]

It exists as an idea in the minds of the people who use it to sell fights and the naive punters who fall for their spiel.

Yet the more knowlegable posters all say it is so... and all you can do is desperately repeat an untruth and hope people stop attacking it successfully. You are resorting to silly tactics, hen ce no reason even to respond... It would be like me saying Yes it does exist!!! That is not proof. What you are doing is desperate and shows you lost the argument. All you can do is repeat the same untruth. But yes you accomplished one thing: I do not argue on that level it is childish. But I will remind people of that fact occasionally.

So continue your monty python argument clinic diatribe

[billeau2]

Proof presented for the Lineal so far:

1. Multiple examples of historical precedent, so we know WHY it exists and WHERE it came from

2. Concrete examples of when it was used when it was necessary and relied upon.

3. An explanation of how it has power, what makes it potent and the preferred belt for fans who understand the heavyweight division particularly.

[JAB5239]

Who says Wlad became lineal champion by beating Chagaev?

According to TBRB, who are the anonymous, faceless crew most often cited as self appointed custodians of the mythical lineal title, Wlad didn't become lineal champ till he beat Povetkin.

We're wlad and Chageav rated 1st and 3rd with Vits and Wlad never going to fight one another? If so, welcome to a lineal title fight. If you have a problem or question for the TBRB, I'd suggest you email them and ask yourself. And they're not anonymous, you just don't know what or who you're looking for.

[kafkod]

Yet the more knowlegable posters all say it is so... and all you can do is desperately repeat an untruth and hope people stop attacking it successfully. You are resorting to silly tactics, hen ce no reason even to respond... It would be like me saying Yes it does exist!!! That is not proof. What you are doing is desperate and shows you lost the argument. All you can do is repeat the same untruth. But yes you accomplished one thing: I do not argue on that level it is childish. But I will remind people of that fact occasionally.

So continue your monty python argument clinic diatribe

"Yet the more knowlegable posters all say it is so"

Marchegiano knows more about boxing history than anybody else in this discussion, and his take on lineages and lineal titles is the same as mine.

[kafkod]

We're wlad and Chageav rated 1st and 3rd with Vits and Wlad never going to fight one another? If so, welcome to a lineal title fight. If you have a problem or question for the TBRB, I'd suggest you email them and ask yourself. And they're not anonymous, you just don't know what or who you're looking for.

I don't need to contact TBRB. I'm just pointing out that they didn't accept Wlad vs Chagaev as a lineal title fight. That's the problem with imaginary titles. They are based on subjective opinions, not objective facts.

[billeau2]

"Yet the more knowlegable posters all say it is so"

Marchegiano knows more about boxing history than anybody else in this discussion, and his take on lineages and lineal titles is the same as mine.

Marg is in the minority on this one. But even he concedes certain points while disagreeing about others. His point is that the Lineal was corrupted, which causes him to question it in the first place, as I post this we are back and fourth on the connection to traditions... and yes he still disagrees but at least understands the arguments. I am a lot closer to reaching a point of compromise with someone who does not simply parrot that something does not exist. I cannot speak for Marg's opinion but I can say he understands and is evaluating my arguments.

Meanwhile, virtually all the other senior members feel that the Lineal exists except the thread drunk Queenie... Puts you in great company as he may have worse reading comp than you do!

[billeau2]

I don't need to contact TBRB. I'm just pointing out that they didn't accept Wlad vs Chagaev as a lineal title fight. That's the problem with imaginary titles. They are based on subjective opinions, not objective facts.

Translation: "Im closing my eyes now!!! The lineal does not exist! wa wa!" You don't need to do anything! Just continue the nonsense and exersize your right not to research facts...

[kafkod]

Marg is in the minority on this one. But even he concedes certain points while disagreeing about others. His point is that the Lineal was corrupted, which causes him to question it in the first place, as I post this we are back and fourth on the connection to traditions... and yes he still disagrees but at least understands the arguments. I am a lot closer to reaching a point of compromise with someone who does not simply parrot that something does not exist. I cannot speak for Marg's opinion but I can say he understands and is evaluating my arguments.

Meanwhile, virtually all the other senior members feel that the Lineal exists except the thread drunk Queenie... Puts you in great company as he may have worse reading comp than you do!

I don't believe you understand March's opinion any more than you understand mine. .

[Willie Pep 229]

It tells me that, as i said earlier. lineal titles are a marketing tool used to sell fights.

Spinks was a massive underdog vs Tyson. I'm sure that, going by how scared he looked in the ring pre-fight, even Spinks himself knew he didn't have a cat in hell's chance of winning. I think he probably asked for a King's ransom to sell his mythical title to the promoters of the fight, and making it a PPV was the only way give him what he was asking for.

OK let's say all that is true.

The fact that it was on PPV and not HBO regular subscription tells you that the fans saw more value in the lineal title than they did in the "undisputed" HBO marketing scheme.

We are arguing whether there is legitimacy to the lineal title. This shows there is because it was where the fans wanted to spend their money. Not on the Berbick, Tucker, Smith trilogy. Even HBO recognized that the lineal title fight was more important.

There was no scam involved. Pointing out Spinks' weakness is a disingenuous argument. Spinks' likely loss was no different than Patterson to Liston or Bradock to Louis. But we still wanted those fights.