Wlad–Chagaev & the lineal HW title

[billeau2]

I really do not understand how folks reckon any other weight division can claim lineal ties.

The thing is, I really don't think these fellas actually want sanction body bull**** to be a consideration for lineage. I think they think they do because it has a transitive value to Fury, but, what none of them probably know is if we are to say OK, all the weight divisions have a lineage and their lineage begins when the first champion of their weight is crowned, those are all WBC champions. Do they really want to elevate the WBC? I don't think so because now your transitive is Wilder's claim that his belt is the most prestigious and historic rather than Fury's lineal claim. Juxtaposed to Joshua's unified elevating the WBC for Wilder seems like something Joshua fans wouldn't be too keen on.

Certainly it is so that if one elevates one of the alphabetic championships, it elevates their champion. Certainly I wonder if this is understood... "Ok so now one of the alphabets stands supreme, happens to be Wilder's belt" lol. On a macro level I think society has lost the value of tradition. Weight divisions have their place, but there is a reason why the heavyweight title is sacred and it has everything to do with the lineal, albeit perhaps indirectly so.

Fighting pursuits and egalitarian notions of fairness come from the concept of no restraints on whom can fight for glory. All the shopkeepers in New York in the 1800's who wrote "Irish need not apply" could not keep the Irish from fighting for fistic glory for the heavyweight title. Way before Jackie Robinson broke the color line in baseball Jack Johnson had opportunities. As bad as discrimination was in the past, how much worse would it have been if government syndication had been allowed to determine the champions?

Regarding your point about weight divisions, they did indeed pave a way to divide and create more parasitical organizations. The first organizations were focused on creating legitimate places for bouts. The fairgrounds were not going to cut it, and the barges were not for polite society. Athletic clubs, Dinner clubs and other such places had to be secured for bouts and it had to be done so it was proper.

[Marchegiano]

Let's go back to the very beginning of English boxing. Figg is our first champion correct? How did that happen? Figg toured England claiming to be the best and allowed any man to challenge him. Contrary to some lazy reporting we do have record of him boxing Ned Sutton in Captain Godfrey's book. Figg was considered a "slaughterer". It was what it sounds like, ye olden talk for puncher.

Ok, now comes in a fella whose name has been lost to time. Some lazy reporters may have claimed his name is Tito, it isn't, that comes from a game. The Venetian Gondolier is called Gondolier because as far as the English were concerned that was his name. So, maybe it was just a dude from Veneto named Gondolier, but, most of us just assume his name was lost in translation and Gondolier probably reflects his job outside of punching

The Gondolier reckons he can lick Figg. In fact he reckon the English don't even know proper boxing. Figg answers his challenger with a challenge himself. Figg says Figg is no longer the greatest pugilist in England and even though he'd willing fight The Gondolier if The Gondolier really wanted to prove himself to the English he'd have to fight Figg student Bob Whittaker.

Bob and Gondo get it on. This is the first international fight recorded on English soil. There isn't much to say about the actual fight except that Bob used a technique called 'flopping". Is what it sounds like, when Gondo would throw a punch Bob would roll with it and drop to the ground ending the round.

This worked pretty well for Bob. There are conflicting reports, all of them English reports, about the end. Some claim Gondo just quit all pissed off Bob kept flopping because in Veneto that was illegal. Others claim Bob wore the ol' boy out and punched him square in the belly and grounded the Venetian. The only thing I can say about either is outside of the claim in the Bob Whittaker story as told by Egan I don't know of any Venetian rules set, however, if we are to believe the claim about Venetian rules then we must believe the Venetian is used to body shots as Egan also claims they did not punch to the face or head, only about the body and chest. This claim might have something to do with Christian sensibilities, boxing was banned specifically because it disfigures the face which is the image of God because we are made in his image and since disfiguring an image of God is blasphemy as is boxing. Not hitting to the face, no problem with the Church....I got distracted, sorry.

It may interest some to know in the version of events where the Gondolier quits he also curses England. I don't remember exactly, but to the effect of " Curse you England, Her people don't know what boxing is and will never give any foreign man a fair fight" which I reckon is kind of funny today. England, America, and maybe Germany are probably the most accused nations on the planet.

All that is important is to note is Figg claimed the title of supremacy and Bob had it passed to him. Bob was elected by the former champion to be the new champion. Who knows what happens if Bob lost, he didn't lose in any version of the tale so it doesn't really matter.

When the fight was done and over James took the stage to announce to his public they'd be in for a real treat because in a week's time his new student would be there to topple Bob.

Nat Peartree would fight Robert Whitaker for the HW crown one week later. Nat cut Bob up good and closed his eyes. "Damn'me What is a man when he is not beat but eyes do not allow sight"

Nat becomes champion how? Because he beat Bob or because Figg elected him? It wouldn't become an issue for sometime actually but it was really because Figg said so. Again, who know what happens if Nat loses, in not version of event does anyone claim he may have.

Peartree loses to a guy named Gritton, Gritton to a fella called Pipes, Pipes has a back and forth with a fella names Gretting. Bill Gretting and John Gritton often get confused but are totally different men. Pipes is Tom Allen. If you do research most often you'll see him as Tom Pipes but sometime they use his real name.

Everyone I have named but the Gondolier are Figg's students who all trained and performed out of Figg's Amphitheatre. If you're a bit suspect as to the legitimacy of all these in house Figg fights whose outcomes are predicted by Figg with absolute 100% correct exactness bubba you ain't too slow I reckon. I do myself, but whether those fights were legitimate or not don't really matter yet.

While Pipes and Gretting were having their back and forth another student of Figg claimed the championship, kind of. George Taylor defeats Gretting when Gretting was champion. Figg basically dictated to his students who was champion and no one argued. Figg wanted Pipes to be champion and so George did not press the issue yet. Gretting and Pipes would continue to fight one another for the title even though George had defeated the champion.

John Gritton, to my knowledge, quietly retired into a manager role at the amphitheater rather than losing to Pipes in the ring. Pipes was simply the Figg student who claimed the title after Gritton retired and Figg okayed it.

Just to recap, Whitaker whoops Gondo, Peartree closed Bob's eyes, Gritton KO's Nat, and John retires from the ring to work in the amphitheatre while Pipes is elevated by Figg to champion. Pipes mixes status up with Gretting. While Gretting is champion he loses to Taylor. Pipes reclaimed the title by beating Greatting rather than Taylor because Figg says so.

OK, so the champion is Pipes, kind of. Figg announces Pipes days are numbered as his final star pupil takes the stage. Jack Broughton enters the scene. Jack whoops Pipes and is called champion. James Figg dies.

There is now a power vacuum and how the title can be transferred can be challenged for the first time. George Taylor pretty promptly set to just that. He starts his own amphitheatre and claims the title on the basis of man who beat the man.

Broughton also started his own amphitheatre because Figg had passed his onto a George Stevenson, I believe, and the three houses competed for asses in seats. Broughton had the endorsement of Figg as champion. Figg's own amphitheatre would try to maintain control over boxing but did not challenge Broughton's champion claim. George Taylor and his amphitheatre did.

Jack and George agreed to fight at Jack's amphitheatre for George's claim. This is what legitimized man who beat the man. On one hand Jack had to give up some of the power he held on the other he could gain more if he played his cards right. He knew that if he allowed Figg's amphitheatre to dictate what is boxing he'd have little control, but if he lost to George he'd have none. He chose to minimize Figg's amphitheatre role in championship boxing and instead tried his hand at accepting legitimate claims and George's as legitimate.

Jack of course chose to fight George. Well, he built the fight by first fighting good ol' Gretting a few times, then he and Taylor fought a few and the case was settled. If Jack hadn't fought George then who know what would have happened. Had Jack stayed in his own lane, George in his and Figg's people in theirs, then maybe boxing would have split into three groups, maybe it would have died young. George and Jack consolidated the fan base though and left Figg's people dependant on him rather than he them.

Broughton would beat the tar out of Figg's Amphitheatre rep George Stevenson later on. It wasn't meant to be so brutal, in fact it was meant to help the Figg crew continue on without Figg or total control over boxing. Afterward Broughton would codify his rule set. He was protecting himself as much as anyone else.

This is all very early English boxing history, but, clearly man who beat the man wasn't as natural a thing as one might assume. It was a planned thing that became a tradition because it grants power over boxing to the winner while the alternatives give it to a third party overseer.

Pressing on, Broughton loses to Jack Slack. A man with no connections to any amphitheatres. Boxing leaves the control of the venue and becomes controlled by the champion. We enter an age of fixed fights and counterfeit champions. The english title is basically for sale.

Slack loses to Stevens after being champion for a decade. Stevens loses to Meggs in a poorly pulled off farce and falls into disgrace, Meggs loses to Millsom, Millsom to Jachau, Jachua to Darts who drops and regains his title to and from Lyons before finally losing to Corcoran. Corcoran loses to Sellers and Sellers loses to Fearns. Fearn's only fight ever is with Sellers, he retires.

Finally comes Tom Johnson, probably the first legitimate champion since Jack Slack. Johnson beat a whole slew of well known pugilists from his day before claiming the championship in front of a crowd of thousands. He would validate his claim by touring England and taking on all challengers.

Why I keep going is because even though I've established where man who beat the man came from and why it's seen as more important than anything else I have to to voer it being challenged. We've seen retirements and the lineage continue through multiple vacancies but Gritton nor Fearns never came back to reclaim their title. Probably because their fights were dubious in the first place.

Johnson would retire unbeaten with a nice 10-0 record. Very respectable for bare knuckle. Lucky for us Johnson retired at a right easy year to remember, 1790, that same year Daniel The *** Mendoza would claim the championship. Mendoza is not normally credited as champion until 1794.

What happened was in 1790 Tom retires and Daniel claims the throne. In 1791 Tom comes out of retirement to fight Ben Brain striping Mendoza of any claim. Tom is still the champion until Brain beats Tom in 1791. Ben is now champion because he is the man who beat the man even if that man retired and came back. Brain himself would retire in 1791 but would comeback and retire again in 1794 forcing the earliest Mendoza can make a claim 1794. He does, and defends it against Bill Warr, and old foe of Johnson's.


Daniel The *** invents all sorts of stuff as champion. Defense, posturing, blocking, footwork, parry, counterpunch, all The ***'s inventions or greatly modified by The ***. The *** then invented ticketing for a sporting event. The *** also invented rousing the audience through the media, newspapers in his day. Daniel also invented soft gloves for training. He was a LW, WW, MW, and HW. ge got titles at LW, MW, and HW I believe, well definitely at HW and MW not sure if the other was LW of WW.

The people of England hated The *** for being a *** and so they elected one of the nobleman to cheat him out of his title. John Jackson held Daniel's ponytail and whaled his face until he fell to a heap to cheer and applause. John Jackson then retires and starts the first pugilistic club, called The Pugilistic Club while we enter the next English era of farce fights. Rather than back room deals this era featured overt cheating with unfortunate challengers who were not allowed to win.

Tom Owen would be our next guy folks call champion. With Jackson gone the title was again vacant and even though Tom hardly had any resume at all he was credited for inventing the dumbell. Fight a couple of fellas, becomes champion, loses to Barty, fights a few more fellas, beats an old Mendoza and retires. Barty is now our champion.

Jack Bartholomew has even less to him, fought a couple of guys before Owen, lost to one of them then whooped Owen in a questionable match. Barty leaves us swiftly because the return of a true king. Jem Belcher was the grandson of Jack Slack. Jem stack 11 wins before eating a few losses and retiring. Nothing real big here, but Jem was a great champion.

Hen the Game Chicken Pearce was a total badass. 7 wins, no losses, and in his free time he runs into burning buildings to save women and children. I ain't even half whistlin' dixie. Game Chicken retired undusted because he became ill. Poor fellow didn't last long, but was pretty damn cool.

John Gully is seen as the next champion because He'd fought Hen well once and was scheduled to do it again until Hen fell ill. Folks were happy to entertain Gully as a must for one half the vacancy. Gully fought and beat Bob Gregson for the vacant title left by Hen. He'd fight Gregson a few more times then retire to be a bookmaker and them MP. Ain't even half whistlin' bubba. MP champion Gully. Well actually **** I could be wrong. I assume MP stand for member of parliament.

Post Gully we have a nice fresh round of Cheatie MacCheater. Tom Cribb's punk ass lost to several men but for some reason kept getting a freeride. His first dubious match was against Bill Richmond. Bill was a black man and easily and flagrantly cheated. then our great champion Cribb moves on to being knock right the **** out by Jem Belcher, remember the grandson of Slack, but is given ample time to wake back up and keep fighting. Jem KO's Tom in 18rnds, Tom got Jem back by 35. Our good ol pal Gregson makes an appearance. Cribb probably actually beat that one. The the Molyneaux debacle. Cribb is KO'd for over thirty seconds, the crowd rushes the ring to protect Cribb from losing. The ref refuses to count until the crowd is seated. Molyneaux is beaten, bitten, punches, and kicked, by the crowd. Cribb regains himself while Molyneaux is left in a deadly state. Molyneaux is compelled to fight on by his corner and get KO'd himself. The English are a bit embarrassed and over Moly a prize anyway and call him champion along with Cribb. Molyneaux would die not long after and would never live a healthy life after having faced Cribb's audience.

King George present Tom Cribb with a lion skin and gold belt. The fancy give Molyneaux a silver cup and a leather and copper belt. These are the first champion belts in boxing history.

Outside of a few more cheats over black men and sparring nobelity Cribb doesn't do much. He was known to use soft gloves to train with nobles so that they could feel his power without getting too disfigured.

That's the first hundred years of boxing history kids. Just went from 1722 to 1822.

Tom Spring would become champion when Tom Cribb retired and elected Tom Spring as the new champion the same way that James Figg elected Bob Whitaker. Spring fought for the vacant against Bill Neat. Most of Spring's career happens prior to Cribb's retirement and his elevation to champion so he only gets in two defenses against the same challenger and then retires.

Spring retires in 1824 leaving another vacancy. Tom Cannon claims it that year and fights a man named Hudson if memory is still firing right. Like most dubious character Cannon does have many fights in his career. He had two fights, won a vacant title, defended against the same man he beat for the vacant, then dropped his belt in a dubious match to Jem Ward.

Jem Ward is, in my opinion, the worst champion boxing was ever forced to suffer. If one simply glances over Jem's record you'll see a bare knuckle record with somewhere in the ballpark of twenty wins to just three losses and probably think he was a pretty damn good champion. What you wouldn't be seeing is all the fixing and bull****ting Jem did.

Jem starts boxing at fifteen and racks up nine wins by the time he's twenty. Later that same year he also suffer his first loss. Jem was boxing a mane named Bill Abbott, and getting the better of him. Jem was also the heavy favorite to win. "Now, Bill, look sharp, hit me and I’ll go down." said Ward so loud the audience, the betting audience, could hear him.

The Pugilistic Club moved in swiftly with an investigation. Ward ended up fessing up to accepting a 100 pound bribe. Jem Ward was banned from PC sanctioned matches.

Jem would continue to box after being banned in two forms. If he was available to stand in for a no show or some such similar situation he could box to entertain the crowd who had bought tickets and such but the results could be voided by the PC. The other way Ward kept himself active was by fighting under aliases.

Ward's ban is lifted after a year. Jem has some wins, some losses, fixes a few farces, and buys himself the championship from Tom Cannon in one of the highest profile matches of the bare knuckle era. Cannon had secured Tom Spring and Tom Cribb for his corner men. Guaranteeing an absurd turn out for his going away party that did not disappoint. Ward would beat Cannon in ten minute fight few believe was authentic today.

From here out Ward isn't just rich he's famous as can be. He's got the blessing of three generations of champions and all a huge population saw it. As champion Ward sits on ass for a year then has a fake fight he's given credit for with one of his fake fighting buddies from the last, just a quick cash grab to float him. Ward sits on ass for another year.

In 1827 Ward is pressured by the public into accepting a fight with Peter Crawley. He was to either retire and accept Peter's claim for championship or fight Peter and prove he was still the champion of pugilism. Jem has no fund to bribe Crawley with and has to actually fight this man. Peter knock Ward out and becomes the new champion but promptly retired and refuses to fight Ward again allowing Jem a chance to reclaim his title while losing the fight for it.

Jem sits on his title until he runs low on money then throws another fake fight for another fake win.

Ward does this a few more times with a specific fella he installed as the Irish champion named Simon Byrne.

This was seen as an impressive unification when Jem did it but the truth was it was all bull****.

James Burke challenges Jem Ward. First Ward retires and elects Simon Byrne champion. Burke whoops Byrne, thinking he's a real and legitimate high level fighter, so bad Byrne ends up dead. I've not mentioned a death since Molyneaux and that was only after a few years of suffering with his injuries. Byrne died three days after Burke KO'd him. Burke was jailed for murder, but later released.

Ward then reclaimed his title stating Burke's fight with Byrne was not a championship quality match afterall and he'd have to continue on as champion because he possessed true Englishness....whatever that means, Deaf Burke is from London.

Ward is seen a champion. Burke issues a new challenge. Ward answers by requesting an absurd purse. Everyone laughs at Deaf Burke's misfortune because no one believes he will be able to come up with the money. For a few years Burke's a joke while Ward sits on ass claiming the championship. Burke did actually raise the money. He traveled England doing odd jobs, like just fixing your plow or helping you build a fence. The people of England financed Burke's challenge.

As Burke was being publicly funded Ward could keep track of his efforts. Ward would raise the stakes as James got closer and closer to his goal.

Eventually Ward took the money and retired. Told Burke to fight his baby brother Nick Ward.

Burke beats the **** of out Nick Ward. Jem Ward claims that fight wasn't good enough to call Burke champion, Burke's too ****** to be champion, comes out of retirement and reclaims his title.

Having succeeded in doing little for the people of England but giving their money to Ward, Burke goes to America. After Byrne got killed the Irish scene was keen to get their champion back in the ring with the English champion to prove their mettle. The Irish champion was Sam O'Rourke. The thing was the Irish didn't agree with the English, they felt Jem's claim over the title was illegitimate and that Burke was the true English champion. The Americans agreed, and, had a nice size audience with deep pockets. Sam and James fought in the US for the English crown in a move to take the title from Burke.

Deaf Burke knocks the piss out of Sam O'Rourke and is crowned by the American Fancy, sometimes call The Gentry, champion while much of England and Ward gnash gnarled teeth and shake wrinkled fists.

It isn't until Burke actually loses that Ward gives up his belt. Ward is scared of Burke so while the Americans give him the title Ward does not press the issue because now to get his title back the audience demands the one thing Jem Ward was never willing to give James Burke, a fight.

Bendigo Thompson beats Burke in around 1840ish. Jem Ward presents Bendigo with his belt and retires to a hotel he owns.

Bold Bendigo was a means for the Ward family to regain control of the title. His resume is just lousy with DQs. He won a claim of his title by DQ in a vacancy fight elected by Ward while Burke was fighting O'Rourke. He lost his claim to Ben Caunt, also by DQ, and the same man he fought for the vacant Ward title. He the beat Burke, yep, by DQ. Burke should not have came to England. Now he has a claim and Ward drops his objections and gives his blessing and belt up to Bendigo.

Bendigo DQs out again to Caunt who DQs out to Nick Ward, Jem Ward's baby brother, Nick Ward loses to Caunt in a seemingly straightforward and legitimate fight. Ben Caunt DQs out to Bendigo.









We're up to 1850. Not quite the history of the HW division explained but we're getting there.

I'll take a break given it's about 1:30 AM here and if I'm to do this right I ought to include the American aspects with Tom Hyer and Yankee Sullivan. That's take some time, but you can already see I am setting up for the first world title fights.

We're not quite done with the Jem Ward posse, but I'm getting tired and it does mix in with the Hyer history so I'll call her quits for now. Also I kind of dropped mentioning weight early on. I didn't mean to, it's just a ton to explain and remember and I forgot some ****. I'll edit it in with the added info when I type that ****.


I just figured....you know...should explain what lineals is and to explain what lineal is I need to explain 300 years of boxing history so ****, may as well tell the story of the HW division from England forward given I can and ain't no one else who can ever going to because they feel like that information is worth money.

[Laligalaliga]

It would... Homever was upset would lose their claim to the title. If it was the lineal then it would be the lineal title holder who was beat. It does not have to be difficult. If you and your brother are at a will for a rich aunt, the aunt might give you both an interest in the property. Maybe she says nephew 1 you get to live in the property the rest of your life, nephew 2 your family gets the property to do with as you wish. You both have a different claim to the property, different interests...You have a life estate and the other guy an estate in remainder.

If the lineal is beat then someone becomes the new lineal. The confusion comes because you want the other title holders to conform and they certainly should, but thats the problem! With all these agencies there is no reason to give up their paper champions, to determine the best. Do you see perhaps why under those conditions, the fans should say "Hey! screw the paper titles, we want the best guys to fight, and this fighter is the lineal champ." So the lineal when declared, becomes a way to assert that process by the fans. As M has told you, the lineal as a traditional title, has the strength of being the voice of the fans and being an ancient tradition.

Regarding Fury specifically, as the lineal he did not declare the title to avoid fighting the other guys, he declared it to put it on the line against one of the other guys considered at the top of the division.

Talking about the best guys. How do you categorize a fighter as one of the best guys. For example, Ortiz, hez beaten no body. His best win is Jennings who just KTFO last week by a midget and got KTFO himself on his first step up fight.
On what basis are eating him as one of the best guys?

[QueensburyRules]

Certainly it is so that if one elevates one of the alphabetic championships, it elevates their champion. Certainly I wonder if this is understood... "Ok so now one of the alphabets stands supreme, happens to be Wilder's belt" lol. On a macro level I think society has lost the value of tradition. Weight divisions have their place, but there is a reason why the heavyweight title is sacred and it has everything to do with the lineal, albeit perhaps indirectly so.

Fighting pursuits and egalitarian notions of fairness come from the concept of no restraints on whom can fight for glory. All the shopkeepers in New York in the 1800's who wrote "Irish need not apply" could not keep the Irish from fighting for fistic glory for the heavyweight title. Way before Jackie Robinson broke the color line in baseball Jack Johnson had opportunities. .

--- Jackie broke MLB black color line, but foreign Latinos had been there from the beginning and now dominate MLB compared to their tiny populations.

Bud Fowler in 1874 was the first black player of note and the only high profile player from Cooperstown, and should be in the HOF with his own room that delves into the unfortunate creation myth MLB perpetuated...maybe in the next century if the US can survive it's injustices.

In the meantime, John L was a handy turn of the century pro baseball player, and JJOHNSON played a 1904 season on the Philly Giants with Fellow Texan, HOF quality pitcher Rube Foster who became the founder of the raucous Negro League. It was Rube who squirreled JJ into Canada on his team train to skip his sentencing for his Mann act conviction.

Just sayin'...

Who you got in a lineal bare knuckler, Sully or JJ.

[Jax teller]

The phrase "the man who beats the man" has history behind it.

Do you really want to learn that history or sit there and be contrarian while you tell me modern sentiments as if I, of the two of us, missed their precedence and then continuation in and throughout history?

I am not even a little bit unsure about the traditions Jax. I know them well.


How do you "man who beat the man" one lineage intertwined with the HW lineage into 16 new ones?

Gonna crown one man the heir of all that and the have every champion from every division have a go at him? That is how it was done before the bodies. That is the tradition lineal invokes.

Since it is ****ing illegal to do that Jax we just watch the division they all used to funnel into.

Why can't I compare monarchy to championship? Do you think we call them kings by chance?

Do you think man who beat the man reigns over all because it's simple?

Why do you argue when I've so much to teach? I want to teach you where man who beat the man came from but I don't reckon your mind is tuned for learning.

You can't compare because the passing of the torch doesn't require the monarch to be, to better the current monarch to take their place. King is just in relation to their place at the top of boxing, it is a metaphor they are not literally a King.

I am arguing because I do not agree with your stance that you know better than everyone else because you do not recognise progression and evolution within the sport, choosing nostalgia and claiming it to be historical lesson.

If you want to teach people then do so but don't be condisending just saying you know stuff people don't and don't be surprised when you get questioned. Often there are different ways of interpritating history and your interpretaion may not always be the right one or sometimes entirely relevant.

[Anthony342]

I remember the 80s. Mullets, tight jeans ( ain't skinny just small) bandanas, and cigarettes. Everyone's a street fighting kung fu master who met Bruce Lee and whooped Chuck Norris while listening to Motley Crue's Dr. Feelgood

I obviously like anything that connects the past to the present, that said I like my sanctioning bodies too.

There's only one force responsible for cleaning up boxing as much as it is presently. It's easy to say to yourself the law would have eventually reigned boxing in, but, the law had over a hundred years to get that done and failed to do anything but drive boxing into some real dirty criminal atmospheres.

Yankee Sullivan is a badass for having whooped Morrissey right in front of Morrissey's gang with their pistols drawn and left the ring to DQ himself so that Morrissey won the fix in the end. Cool story, but, Yankee ain't considered champion by no man...ain't that a kick in the **** for one of the greatest figures in boxing history. Dude kind of made American boxing, and got ****ed over by American crime.

Boxing and its boxers has a long history of outsmarting the lawman while hoodwinking the crimeman. Reckon it's a good thing we've a proper sport today.

Also, let's not pretend lineal wasn't ****ed. Corbett ****ed Maher and now Maher is considered champion by no man...well maybe some Irish. How about Deaf Burke? Jem Ward ****ed him over like five times and rather than giving Burke his reign at the start of the ****ery we only credit him after years of winning while Jem ducked him, retired and reclaimed his title after the vacancy fight, rinse and repeat for years, plus that 50 mil AJ-Wilder nonsense is a Jem Ward move except he got Burke's money before he denied the fight.

So yeah, give and take. Lineal is for when the bodies are bull**** and we all know it. Bodies are for when the industry itself becomes bull**** and we all know it.

Probably the bodies need a bit of their power stripped from them by fans, but I don't hate them.

Ah yes, I grew up in the '80s and remember the decade well. But you mean Girls, Girls, Girls by Motley Crue. Dr. Feelgood didn't come out until the early '90s.

[Marchegiano]

Ah yes, I grew up in the '80s and remember the decade well. But you mean Girls, Girls, Girls by Motley Crue. Dr. Feelgood didn't come out until the early '90s.

Well son of a ***** if you ain't right.

[Marchegiano]

You can't compare because the passing of the torch doesn't require the monarch to be, to better the current monarch to take their place. King is just in relation to their place at the top of boxing, it is a metaphor they are not literally a King.

I am arguing because I do not agree with your stance that you know better than everyone else because you do not recognise progression and evolution within the sport, choosing nostalgia and claiming it to be historical lesson.

If you want to teach people then do so but don't be condisending just saying you know stuff people don't and don't be surprised when you get questioned. Often there are different ways of interpritating history and your interpretaion may not always be the right one or sometimes entirely relevant.

A bad king swiftly loses his throne. You know about the Chuckies and Crommers. Why are you pretending like succession is always pretty and doesn't require the public's blessing?

Yes, they most certainly do need to make the best case for the throne. You know about succession crisis and you know about pretenders to a throne. I feel like you're playing ****** on purpose but maybe I misunderstood you.

------------

recognize what? Wait a minute I am lost as to why you believe I lack knowledge of events that are even easier to look up.

1.) Lineal is historical. I am not the man who coined the phrase nor first mentioned lineal as Sullivan's belt....you know this.

2.) I don't often speak to 20th century history because I assume you know it. It is very easy to look up. I help with what is difficult.


--------------

Condescending? I feel the same about you all.

Who here has clearly done some level of work to achieve an understanding beyond most? Who here posts a little bit more than the millionth repeat response reflecting the same god damn point the last post had?

I tell you guys you're broadcastor educated because you don't even know the vocabulary until ESPN uses the term. I know where you got you **** from. The easy, lazy, casual sources.

You were told what to think. You did not do research to attain an understand over 300 years of boxing history. I did.

You telling me I am wrong without having even taken a look into the history I thump is condescension bubba.

You willing disregarding the information makes you a Mark bubba.

-------------


If anyone had an interpretation of the information for me to consider I would consider, but, when all the **** you say comes from lazy sources, bubba, I done ****in' heard it. I too watch ESPN can you dig it?

It isn't that it comes from someone else. It's because all you are doing is proxy arguing some bull**** you got from a person whose job is to manipulate your interpretations....you silly billy.

[billeau2]

--- Jackie broke MLB black color line, but foreign Latinos had been there from the beginning and now dominate MLB compared to their tiny populations.

Bud Fowler in 1874 was the first black player of note and the only high profile player from Cooperstown, and should be in the HOF with his own room that delves into the unfortunate creation myth MLB perpetuated...maybe in the next century if the US can survive it's injustices.

In the meantime, John L was a handy turn of the century pro baseball player, and JJOHNSON played a 1904 season on the Philly Giants with Fellow Texan, HOF quality pitcher Rube Foster who became the founder of the raucous Negro League. It was Rube who squirreled JJ into Canada on his team train to skip his sentencing for his Mann act conviction.

Just sayin'...

Who you got in a lineal bare knuckler, Sully or JJ.

I honestly do not get you... You feel this way? Yet you support the intrusion of the very forces you rally against. I agree with you on these points. What do you think happens when you bring the government in to an organized endevour?

When New Jersey sought to make martial artists pay fees to teach and be licensed you should have seen who was on their board my friend! Literally and I 5h1t you not! One family of gumbas had plagurized an article I wrote and had published in another magazine. Real upstanding types!

Ok so you have an issue with the lineal? Fine... Lets just call out a process where the best heavyweight fighters, which is an OPEN division where anyone can compete, and which is the top of the food chain... have to fight the best to be a champion. Call it the will of the fans ok?

What kept the black players out of baseball...it was not the fans. You had commisioners, who Branch Rickey had to passify, etc. Why do you think an organization which gets its credability from something external to the sport, is a good thing while calling the lineal which has tradition, the will of the fans behind it, a fairy tale? Am I missing something?

[billeau2]

A bad king swiftly loses his throne. You know about the Chuckies and Crommers. Why are you pretending like succession is always pretty and doesn't require the public's blessing?

Yes, they most certainly do need to make the best case for the throne. You know about succession crisis and you know about pretenders to a throne. I feel like you're playing ****** on purpose but maybe I misunderstood you.

------------

recognize what? Wait a minute I am lost as to why you believe I lack knowledge of events that are even easier to look up.

1.) Lineal is historical. I am not the man who coined the phrase nor first mentioned lineal as Sullivan's belt....you know this.

2.) I don't often speak to 20th century history because I assume you know it. It is very easy to look up. I help with what is difficult.


--------------

Condescending? I feel the same about you all.

Who here has clearly done some level of work to achieve an understanding beyond most? Who here posts a little bit more than the millionth repeat response reflecting the same god damn point the last post had?

I tell you guys you're broadcastor educated because you don't even know the vocabulary until ESPN uses the term. I know where you got you **** from. The easy, lazy, casual sources.

You were told what to think. You did not do research to attain an understand over 300 years of boxing history. I did.

You telling me I am wrong without having even taken a look into the history I thump is condescension bubba.

You willing disregarding the information makes you a Mark bubba.

-------------


If anyone had an interpretation of the information for me to consider I would consider, but, when all the **** you say comes from lazy sources, bubba, I done ****in' heard it. I too watch ESPN can you dig it?

It isn't that it comes from someone else. It's because all you are doing is proxy arguing some bull**** you got from a person whose job is to manipulate your interpretations....you silly billy.

The concept of the Empror in China is the same: The empror must fufill the mandate of heaven which means creating a structure where resources can reach all areas of China during emergencies like a food famine. When the empror could not fufill those mandates he was deposed.... This is a historical fact.