Introducing: The Boxing Scene Divisional Ratings

[kayjay]

Thanks for the clarification, Jake. IMO the term lineal/linear champ should be avoided altogether, unless it genuinely applies (steady succession of the man beating the man in a given division). I agree with the people who say that line is broken if the recognized champ vacates or retires. Some people just gotta have a lineal champ, but it's really not so. I haven't done the research, but given the mess created by the ABC orgs over the years, is there even one true lineal champ in any division today?

By your logic there hasn't been a lineal champ in 100 years

[crold1]

Warp: Easy answer is I don't know; different standrads apply which is why I put this together; it reflects the various pundit angles, the business, and some merit (though boxing is not a meritocracy and never has been). As to the notion of whether there are any REAL lineal champions brought up in a different post, I think the real meaning is a case where everyone agrees on the best fighter and that fighter is the champ; in that case, Pavlik and Calzaghe are perfect examples IMO. So is Floyd at 47. Pretty much everyone in the lineal slide except Erdei and Casa.

[NachoMan]

By your logic there hasn't been a lineal champ in 100 years

It's not my logic. It is what it is. Like I said some folks just gotta have a lineal champ because it just sounds good. You, apparently, are one of those people.