Originally posted by billeau2
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
How long at the top?
Collapse
-
Originally posted by LacedUp View PostIt's more like the last half of the major 3.5,
Regardless, Wlad made that belt at heavyweight, it wasn't regarded more than what the IBO is today, which is a non-belt really. Wlad wasn't considered a heavyweight champion back when he won it because the guys who had been fighting for it were guys like Tommy Morrison and Herbie Hide - In other words the B and C level fighters of the heavyweight division.
I'm sure nobody in their right mind would call Herbie Hide, "the former heavyweight champ of the world".
But that is just my opinion, others are welcome to disagree.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LacedUp View PostI feel 'title' is a legit world title, but yes, that is my opinion.
Otherwise we can add all of the NYSAC/NBAW as well as IBA/IBO/WBU and whatever else they are called to it as well, which would make the significance of the question lose it's meaning.
But I guess only OP can explain his criteria? 'titles' I suppose can be all titles.
Comment
-
Originally posted by -Weltschmerz- View PostSo you are saying Haye was more of a heavyweight champion when he beat Valuev?
But neither were 'the' champion. I know the circumstances of how Valuev got his title, which weren't pretty, but at the time of the fight there were multiple world champions, not one definitive world champion like there was when Wlad fought Byrd.
I regard Haye more of a world champion then, than I regard Stiverne now for example, because there clearly is one undisputed champion now.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BattlingNelson View PostTrue. Regional belts is also technically 'title-fights'. The thing is that Wlad went on to become a dominant fighter just like the fighter referred to in the OP.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LacedUp View PostIt's more like the last half of the major 3.5,
Regardless, Wlad made that belt at heavyweight, it wasn't regarded more than what the IBO is today, which is a non-belt really. Wlad wasn't considered a heavyweight champion back when he won it because the guys who had been fighting for it were guys like Tommy Morrison and Herbie Hide - In other words the B and C level fighters of the heavyweight division.
I'm sure nobody in their right mind would call Herbie Hide, "the former heavyweight champ of the world".
But that is just my opinion, others are welcome to disagree.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BattlingNelson View PostWhat is your take on De La Hoya then?
Originally posted by BattlingNelson View PostWhat criteria makes you arrive at that conclusion?
That's not a real belt to me (then). Also, the other belts didn't start recognizing the WBO belt and it's rankings before mid 2000s as well as the Ring Magazine didn't acknowledge it.
So if all those guys didn't acknowledge it, then neither will I.
But Wlad has made the belt mean something now at heavyweight, which means, that if someone should win it in the future it has the history of a long long reign with Klitschko to fall back on, which in my eyes makes a belt. It's like the WBO belt at WW - it's made by Cotto and Pacquiao because everyone just gave it up before that. This also applies to DLH, which I'm sure you're referring to his reign at LW, right?
It's like with Gert Bo Jacobsen - Danish boxing fans like to refer to him as a former world champion, but outside of Denmark he was just a WBO WW belt holder.Last edited by LacedUp; 09-16-2014, 09:40 AM.
Comment
Comment