My new Boxing History Quiz

[LacedUp]

The question is like this:





Spoiler alert!!!!!





















The way I see it, Holmes became HW champion of the World by beating Ali, so that would be my answer. I'm aware that he won a vacant belt against Norton, but that was not for THE title.

yeah the Ali question got me as well.

Ali was the champ when they fought.

[jas]

When there is only one champion, what's to dispute?



"Lineal" is correct, though a lot of us get away with using either.

That was my point. There was nothing to dispute. Vacant lineal thrones can only be competed by the number 1 and 2 contenders .

[BattlingNelson]

based on inconsistency from Ring. they went against tradition. and lineage, by its very nature, is something that follows on. consistency is paramount.

Ring has been very inconsistent and has made several errors in terms of linage.



Sorry to the TS for the thread detour/hijack.

I think there's a need for some definitions in this thread.

Lineal champion:
The man who beat the man who beat the man. When lineage is broken due to the champion retiring or vacating (chnges division), a new lineage is by when the no.1 and no.2 contender fights.

So far so good. What happens when one of the two somehow is unavailable? In Wlad's case the championship is not attainable as long as his brother is active. IMO it would be unfair to Wlad to keep him out of this part of history due to family. Therefore I am ok with lineage being established, in select special cases, when the no.1 fights the no.3.

Undisputed champion: You become undisputed champion when you simultaneously hold every major alphabet belt. Today that means 4 belts (WBA, WBC, IBF and WBO). This has absolutely nothing to do with lineage. In this thread people are IMO giving way too much credibility to those curropt organizations.

An example is Mike Tyson. He was undisputed champion when he fought Michael Spinks. Spinks had no alphabet belt, but was the linear champion (and Ring Magazine champion). Tyson became linear after beating Spinks.

Ring Magazine champion: Is just that. A champion recognized by a trade paper. Nothing more. Nothing less. This has nothing to do with lineage or undisputed.

Best example is Roy Jones Jr. He was recognized as Ring Magazine LHW champion, but he was never lineal. He was never the man who beat the man. He might have been the man to beat, but that's another ballgame. In those days the man who beat the man was Dariusz Michalszewski.


This should cover it.



Sorry for the detour TS.

[TBear]

That was my point. There was nothing to dispute. Vacant lineal thrones can only be competed by the number 1 and 2 contenders .

But the question comes up, Who's number one and number two? The Rings? WBC? IBF? WBC? Boxrec(lol)? Number one and two are inconsistent.

So suppose a popular consensus is agreed upon, which is unlikely, And it involves the WBA champ and the top contender or another champion. There will still be other champions that might have as much claim to this imaginary title and are also beating twos. Multiple lineal titles in each weight division?

Lineal titles would be handed out left and right and today's abc titlists would be winning multiple lineal titles in different weight divisions without ever having to beat the man who beat the man. There would no need to establish you are the true champion at any weight.

Great for marketing and fans of certain fighter but not for the sport. A sport that has become severely diluted by enough short cuts and too many titles already.

[Welsh Jon]

Being linear (lineal? I'm still confused about the difference!) Champion is pretty meaningless in my opinion. It's just a term people throw around to try and prove their guy is not just a paper champion.

The problem is that the meaning of the word champion has become so diluted that promoters need to find ways to legitimise their fighters.

Just having them face the best opposition is too much to ask these days. Better just to call them Linear Champ and hope that impresses people.

[jas]

But the question comes up, Who's number one and number two? The Rings? WBC? IBF? WBC? Boxrec(lol)? Number one and two are inconsistent.

So suppose a popular consensus is agreed upon, which is unlikely, And it involves the WBA champ and the top contender or another champion. There will still be other champions that might have as much claim to this imaginary title and are also beating twos. Multiple lineal titles in each weight division?

Lineal titles would be handed out left and right and today's abc titlists would be winning multiple lineal titles in different weight divisions without ever having to beat the man who beat the man. There would no need to establish you are the true champion at any weight.

Great for marketing and fans of certain fighter but not for the sport. A sport that has become severely diluted by enough short cuts and too many titles already.

Number 1 and 2 going by Ring...

Ring has ran the generally accepted premier set of rankings who operated without the influence of promoters or fighters etc., for years upon years. But recently their purchase by one of the worlds biggest promoters has rendered them less relevant in their importance in influencing the process of identifying lineage.

[jas]

Being linear (lineal? I'm still confused about the difference!) Champion is pretty meaningless in my opinion. It's just a term people throw around to try and prove their guy is not just a paper champion.

The problem is that the meaning of the word champion has become so diluted that promoters need to find ways to legitimise their fighters.

Just having them face the best opposition is too much to ask these days. Better just to call them Linear Champ and hope that impresses people.

Linear is holding all 4 major belts.

Lineal is being the man who beat the man , passed down by a violent lineage.

[miamike]

Linear is holding all 4 major belts.

Lineal is being the man who beat the man , passed down by a violent lineage.

I agree.


I got eight right with the quiz.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Linear is holding all 4 major belts.

Lineal is being the man who beat the man , passed down by a violent lineage.

Lineal isnt holding all 4 belts,, Its the man who beat the man who beat the man

[jas]

Lineal isnt holding all 4 belts,, Its the man who beat the man who beat the man

That's what i said....