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

[kafkod]

What do you think would have happened if Ali was labelled an inserrectionist? A co-conspirator with ties to the Nation of Islam and Malcolm X? The government asked to indict him on such charges? With the people behind the endictement?

Think boy think!!!. Here is a clue ok? When Senator McCarthy, a true rube who had illusions of grandeur, went after J e w i sh producers and actors in Hollywood, he destroyed their careers. Some managed to make it through the witch hunt. You have to understand the power of the government and how it is compelled to act on behalf of the citizenry in Murica. The government is a large hammer, it cannot act with discretion and according to the mean... It is a Frankenstein, and once set on a course, look out! People compelled the government through their actions and protests to act during the Vietnam War and Ali was a major figure because of is noble gesture and words that should be enshrined in any space capsule we send out, to show the potential the human race has...

Power of the people is lineal! Ali had a legitimate claim according to the lineal.

Just a remainder to all: Great thinkers like Hume told us, "Science is Post Priori only constructing a truth after the fact" But it takes a bit to understand why Hume was the Suger Ray Robinson of continental philosophers...

Ali's words are so simple, so elegant and tell a truth everyone can abide by: "I ain't got no beef with no Viet Cong, why should I shoot at them?"

I notice you are ignoring the point I made in the comment you quoted.

Mike Tyson didn't need to beat Michael Spinks to be recognised by millions of sports fans worldwide as The Heavyweight Champion of the World. Lineal championship status is just like the alphabet titles, in that it is only ever as important and respected as the name of the guy who has it.

[kafkod]

No... Only the subset of people we call "Boxing fans." That is the best you can do to try to prove that there was no push for an undisputed lineal title holder given Ali's predicament?

Many of those people were casuals who loved Ali, but many of them were also fans who loved how Ali fought. Both groups were united perhaps... So?

You are misunderstanding the situation again. Nobody questioned Joe Frazier's right to call himself the undisputed world champion. The question everybody wanted answering was ... is Frazier better than Ali? They were universally recognised as the 2 best HWs in the world. Boxing fans wanted to know which of them was Number One.

[Willie Pep 229]

I notice you are ignoring the point I made in the comment you quoted.

Mike Tyson didn't need to beat Michael Spinks to be recognised by millions of sports fans worldwide as The Heavyweight Champion of the World. Lineal championship status is just like the alphabet titles, in that it is only ever as important and respected as the name of the guy who has it.

Yeah he did.

That's why HBO created the term "Undisputed" Heavyweight Champion.

It's one of those paradoxical language things. If he had actually been undisputed he would have been referred to as the Heavyweight Champion without the ahjectival modifier.

"Undisputed" as a term was beat into the American lexicon by HBO who, through Tyson and King, had a monopoly over the HW Championship and an advantage over Showtime. (They were the CBS and NBC of their era.)

But HBO didn't have Spinks and Butch Lewis so they couldn't force that fight.

Not wanting to upset the purest they went with "Undisputed." This recognized all the sanctioning bodies that bowed to their domination of the game and left Spinks for the purist like me to support.

[EDIT] Whom did The Ring Magazine recognized during this period? I don't know.

Once Tyson beat Spinks he became the HW Champion and HBO didn't need to push the 'undisputed' moniker any longer.

From reading some of the other posts it looks "undisputed" has run its course. Now, it seems, that "four belt title" is the new moniker of excellence. I haven't heard 'undisputed' used much lately.

[billeau2]

I notice you are ignoring the point I made in the comment you quoted.

Mike Tyson didn't need to beat Michael Spinks to be recognised by millions of sports fans worldwide as The Heavyweight Champion of the World. Lineal championship status is just like the alphabet titles, in that it is only ever as important and respected as the name of the guy who has it.

How does that follow from your point about Tyson? Can you show me an example of a fighter realtively unknown who became the lineal and remained that way? I doubt it. And EVEN if you were right (I doubt it, I will wait for proof though...) so? What if Spinks beat Tyson? would that create an identity crisis for the Lineal? Can you at least imagine such a scenario and describe it? Doubtful...

[billeau2]

You are misunderstanding the situation again. Nobody questioned Joe Frazier's right to call himself the undisputed world champion. The question everybody wanted answering was ... is Frazier better than Ali? They were universally recognised as the 2 best HWs in the world. Boxing fans wanted to know which of them was Number One.

Yeah and? How does that contradict anything? That is what the lineal is for. You are so hung up on a semantic argument... I mean with good will here, it is making you look very silly. To you the lineal only has authority if it is magically uttered as a PRELUDE to what it accomplishes. Really?

So if you are buying an ice cream cone, you get the cone and do not pay the guy because he has not said, "I will be expecting money for this ice cream?" It has to be made explicit to be real?

[billeau2]

Yeah he did.

That's why HBO created the term "Undisputed" Heavyweight Champion.

It's one of those paradoxical language things. If he had actually been undisputed he would have been referred to as the Heavyweight Champion without the ahjectival modifier.

"Undisputed" as a term was beat into the American lexicon by HBO who, through Tyson and King, had a monopoly over the HW Championship and an advantage over Showtime. (They were the CBS and NBC of their era.)

But HBO didn't have Spinks and Butch Lewis so they couldn't force that fight.

Not wanting to upset the purest they went with "Undisputed." This recognized all the sanctioning bodies that bowed to their domination of the game and left Spinks for the purist like me to support.

[EDIT] Whom did The Ring Magazine recognized during this period? I don't know.

Once Tyson beat Spinks he became the HW Champion and HBO didn't need to push the 'undisputed' moniker any longer.

From reading some of the other posts it looks "undisputed" has run its course. Now, it seems, that "four belt title" is the new moniker of excellence. I haven't heard 'undisputed' used much lately.

The problem is how kafkod and others can be led by the nose when a semantic argument for the primacy of a specific term is deemed necessary to create something that is otherwise real all along. The ancient Mesopotamians believed in the true Logos: language was thought to be magical and able to manifest from a mere utterance. In our society? while this still exists as an occult property of words, it is also typical to create new terms to manipulate. naturally this means that the lineal being stated would depend on the motives of the one stating.

[kafkod]

Yeah he did.

That's why HBO created the term "Undisputed" Heavyweight Champion.

It's one of those paradoxical language things. If he had actually been undisputed he would have been referred to as the Heavyweight Champion without the ahjectival modifier.

"Undisputed" as a term was beat into the American lexicon by HBO who, through Tyson and King, had a monopoly over the HW Championship and an advantage over Showtime. (They were the CBS and NBC of their era.)

But HBO didn't have Spinks and Butch Lewis so they couldn't force that fight.

Not wanting to upset the purest they went with "Undisputed." This recognized all the sanctioning bodies that bowed to their domination of the game and left Spinks for the purist like me to support.

[EDIT] Whom did The Ring Magazine recognized during this period? I don't know.

Once Tyson beat Spinks he became the HW Champion and HBO didn't need to push the 'undisputed' moniker any longer.

From reading some of the other posts it looks "undisputed" has run its course. Now, it seems, that "four belt title" is the new moniker of excellence. I haven't heard 'undisputed' used much lately.

Everybody knew Spinks didn't stand a cat in hell's chance of beating Tyson. HBO were selling the fight by hyping it up to be more important and significant than it actually was. Queensberry and Top Rank played the same game by selling Tyson Fury's comeback fights against no-hopers like Seferi, Schwarz and Wallin as lineal title defences. Then PBC joined the rip-off party by selling Fury vs Wilder as a WBC and lineal title unification fight. The imaginary lineal title is a great way for promoters, networks, etc, to rip of gullible fans.

[JAB5239]

Everybody knew Spinks didn't stand a cat in hell's chance of beating Tyson. HBO were selling the fight by hyping it up to be more important and significant than it actually was. Queensberry and Top Rank played the same game by selling Tyson Fury's comeback fights against no-hopers like Seferi, Schwarz and Wallin as lineal title defences. Then PBC joined the rip-off party by selling Fury vs Wilder as a WBC and lineal title unification fight. The imaginary lineal title is a great way for promoters, networks, etc, to rip of gullible fans.

Yet the lineal title isn't charging a sanctioning fee. Hmmm, who's really ripping off who?

By the way, who is the lightheavyweight champion of the world right now? Is it lineal champ Bivol for beating the best? Or is it Benavidez who was handed an ABC trinket without even having to fight for it?

[kafkod]

Back in 1971 the fact that we didn't use the term 'lineal' at the time is a non-argument. We didn't need the term back then, it was a given.

The people knew who the champion was without the label.

The rise of the sanctioning bodies in the 1980s forced the creation of the retronym "lineal."

We didn't use it in the 1960s and 1970s because we didn't need it. The 'lineal' was the only title we actually recognized so the label wasn't necessary. You fail to recognize that it is a retronym.

So 99.99% of the people didn't know the term but 99.9% of them understood its dynamics. I.e. knew who the champion was.

Of course I recognise that. And I have been trying to get you to recognise the implications of what that means. There was never any such thing as a lineal title, as such, that could be fought for as a stand-alone entity. Rather, lineal championship status was earned retrospectively, as a result of winning a fight for one or more of the recognised title belts.

[kafkod]

Yet the lineal title isn't charging a sanctioning fee. Hmmm, who's really ripping off who?

By the way, who is the lightheavyweight champion of the world right now? Is it lineal champ Bivol for beating the best? Or is it Benavidez who was handed an ABC trinket without even having to fight for it?

Damn .. nobody is paying sanctioning fees to fight for a title that doesn't exist. How amazing is that?

Bivol became the undisputed champion by winning all 4 recognised title belts, plus the Ring title, and nobody has beaten him since. That's why he is The Man at LHW. If you want to call him the lineal champion, I have no argument with that. But he does not hold a lineal title. There is no such thing as a lineal title.