Yet another way to Understand the Lineal

[JAB5239]

. My dad was J e w i s h and I was a bit of a delinquent in junior high school... Just getting left back, always in trouble... So we would visit my grandmother in Brooklyn, and she would look at me and pinch my cheek saying: "hes going to be a doctor? or a lawyer?" My dad would then shoot me a look... .

I laughed out loud at this because my story was similar only with Italian grandparents and aunts and uncles.

Cheek pinchinpinchingts a lost art. Does anybody besides the old timers pinch cheeks anymore? I couldn't go anywhere as a kid without it happening at least once a day if not more!

[billeau2]

I laughed out loud at this because my story was similar only with Italian grandparents and aunts and uncles.

Cheek pinchinpinchingts a lost art. Does anybody besides the old timers pinch cheeks anymore? I couldn't go anywhere as a kid without it happening at least once a day if not more!

[billeau2]

Well yeah, that's why I framed it that way, it is the cross, the one that hits hard.


I might jump around a bit, The daughter's a bit in and out on me today. Just running in needing attention then quick as she came she's gone.


I'd say with this descriptor it is fair for me to claim a fan base needs to grow large enough for former fan bases to acknowledge them before said fans have a voice in lineal.

Which might be a bit shorter than i thought but also covers my ass nicely. I think.

Sounds like you have some custody, I remember when this was problematic... Good to hear! They grow up so damn fast... I swear the days are flying by! And kids show that to you lol.

Yeah the lineal kind of relies upon what Durkheim called "Efforvescence" related to human ritual actions. As a group the sum total of their energy is much greater than the sum of each individual fan... You need a connection, a ritual, a tradition to tie that together. I am going to hit you with one of my insane beliefs: one that won me a best paper award during an academic conference on religion...

Street Gangs, sports worship, any gang with colors... are all an expression of our religious way to interact. No diffrent than the Australian Aborigines with their animal clans, how these associations determine their whole kinship system. Boxing fans are an example. What should it matter when two guys have a fight in a ring? Until it becomes a sporting event... Then there is this efforvescence, this energy, this whole process that makes us feel like part of a greater whole.

So to me, this is the ontological reason for lineal traditions. They are alas no different than for any other sport. When a football game is played, the fans have their role. But here is the thing: For this process to happen we need clarity: Australian Aborigines are forbidden to do certain things like marry certain other animal clan members, eat their own Totem... and the clarity representing the fans efforvescence is an aspect of "the supreme, the best is the man who aspires to beat the best." That whole aspect sets up a faux kinship, faux heredity lineage of undisputed, supreme, best.. I am probably alone in ascribing this to specifically the heavyweight champion. He alone is the biggest, baddest.... I believe the lineal ultimately applies to the heavyweight champ alone.

Ohh also: I think this ties in to your thesis that what we call "boxing" needs the component of individual glory that the Greek ideals brought to the practice. The whole Olympic tradition? Or maybe predates that tradition...You know better than I.

[Ben Bolt]

When I started following pro-boxing in the mid-70s, we had no issues about who the real champion was.
We just followed the lineal title, which in every weight category went back to early 1900 something.
This was unique for boxing, no other sport could show the same consistency, and why we were proud of boxing.

At the time we had WBC and WBA, who most often had separate champs, but we still knew who the lineal was.
And in the cases it was unclear, the pressure on the different champs finally forced them to clash with each other.

The alphabet sh-it started with IBF in 1983. IBF boss Bob Lee stated that the animosity between the WBC and WBA
was damaging boxing tradition and that things should be put right. The Ring welcomed the IBF with open arms.

It turned out, Bob Lee was full of sh-it. Since the foundation of the IBF, boxing took a turn to the worse. Instead of
one lineal champ, we had three alphabet champs.

The ones I blame most for the unique boxing history to disappear in smoke is not Lee, but the lousy boxing journalists
who accepted the situation with three contemporary world champions, and later four (WBO).
Had they been reporters of any other sport, they had been sacked on the spot.

Any boxing reporter today, who is referring every alphabet champ as a "world champ" is a puppet to the boxing orgs,
and worth no respect. That's why we oldies miss Bert Sugar and the other writers who stood up against the corrupt orgs.

[Willie Pep 229]

When I started following pro-boxing in the mid-70s, we had no issues about who the real champion was.
We just followed the lineal title, which in every weight category went back to early 1900 something.
This was unique for boxing, no other sport could show the same consistency, and why we were proud of boxing.

At the time we had WBC and WBA, who most often had separate champs, but we still knew who the lineal was.
And in the cases it was unclear, the pressure on the different champs finally forced them to clash with each other.

The alphabet sh-it started with IBF in 1983. IBF boss Bob Lee stated that the animosity between the WBC and WBA
was damaging boxing tradition and that things should be put right. The Ring welcomed the IBF with open arms.

It turned out, Bob Lee was full of sh-it. Since the foundation of the IBF, boxing took a turn to the worse. Instead of
one lineal champ, we had three alphabet champs.

The ones I blame most for the unique boxing history to disappear in smoke is not Lee, but the lousy boxing journalists
who accepted the situation with three contemporary world champions, and later four (WBO).
Had they been reporters of any other sport, they had been sacked on the spot.

Any boxing reporter today, who is referring every alphabet champ as a "world champ" is a puppet to the boxing orgs,
and worth no respect. That's why we oldies miss Bert Sugar and the other writers who stood up against the corrupt orgs.

I agreed with you.

RE Bold

I would say that the Cable Networks, were the bigger problem when it came to pushing the SBs down our throats. HBO, Showtime, USA, ESPN.

They all made deals with the SBs (and their respective promoters) and then spoke of them as though they mattered the most.

I think by the 1980s the print journalists had lost their mo-jo and it was TV that set the public agenda regarding the SBs. I don't think the print journalist had any chance in stopping the flow (of corrupt money).

I mentioned in a different post that The Ring Magazine had made several sad attempts and failed badly. They tried, but audio-visual was too powerful. It set the agenda.

I blame HBO the most.