Mayweather was never a WBC WW linear champion. Neither was Baldomir.

[PRboxingfan]

1. Thanks for the history lesson. There's a reason I have you on my sig.

2. All the lineages of every single division are broken

Then we don't have to talk about linear champions anymore. Call a guy "THE CHAMP" in any way you want it, be it a "Ring Belt", a box off between the #1 and #2 challengers, a tournament, an unbiased analysis of X or Y fighter's strengths and weaknesses... but please, don't sell me a fallacy just because it sounds good on paper.

There have been great champions, paper champions, undisputed champions, ATG champions... but linear champions died long ago.

All "lineal" championships stem from the defeat of the person considered THE champ of the division. For example, Hopkins was considered THE champ at 160, even if he was just a "unified" champion with all 4 major belts. As soon as Jermain beat him, he became the man that beat the man, and the line, where the word "lineal" comes from, as you've pointed out, begins.

There is always a first "man" in the line "the man who beat the man, who beat the man, who beat the man, etc." You're always going to come to a stopping point, right? That stopping point is always going to be the person considered THE champ in that division. If the line is broken because of retirement or a fighter moving up in weight (i.e. nobody beat him), then the lineal title is vacated and doesn't start again until someone defeats the person considered THE champ (the person who becomes THE champ isn't a lineal champion, obviously).

It's pretty simple and it's not arbitrary in the least.

[wmute]

All "lineal" championships stem from the defeat of the person considered THE champ of the division. For example, Hopkins was considered THE champ at 160, even if he was just a "unified" champion with all 4 major belts. As soon as Jermain beat him, he became the man that beat the man, and the line, where the word "lineal" comes from, as you've pointed out, begins.

There is always a first "man" in the line "the man who beat the man, who beat the man, who beat the man, etc." You're always going to come to a stopping point, right? That stopping point is always going to be the person considered THE champ in that division. If the line is broken because of retirement or a fighter moving up in weight (i.e. nobody beat him), then the lineal title is vacated and doesn't start again until someone defeats the person considered THE champ (the person who becomes THE champ isn't a lineal champion, obviously).

It's pretty simple and it's not arbitrary in the least.

I disagree with that...

So who was lineal Roy? or Darius?

not so simple IMO

EDIT: just to make it clear, I dont think it is always going to be crystal clear, but that's clearly the best way to figure out who THE champ in a division is

[El Jesus]

I disagree with that...

So who was lineal Roy? or Darius?

not so simple IMO

EDIT: just to make it clear, I dont think it is always going to be crystal clear, but that's clearly the best way to figure out who THE champ in a division is

That situation for me personally is impossible to answer, which is why i wish they would have fought each other.

Wmute i think i remember speaking with you about how Welterweight became insane after floyd won the title, with cotto moving up, paul williams emerging, margarito, cintron, judah, clottey etc all in one division. Next thing you know, because Baldomir didint pay for all the belts, you had every belt but the WBC spread out everywhere, and it created a situation with alot of champions, especially after mayweather/de la hoya.

At this point, with margarito having been in the division for seemingly ages, and cotto fighting him, this basically should decide the champion to me, with cotto having beat some contenders (no pun intended) and margarito having done the same for years.

[The_Italian]

there are a few good points and flaws to your arguement.

true if a guy retires AS lineal champion then the titles are vacated and have to be won back and its true...the new lineal champion didnt beat the guy who was the champ before him...

however if you stick to that analysis then leneal champions would never exist...i mean who was the champion the day boxing officially became a sport? no one...

someone had to become the champion out of a big group of guys...

right? if you go back and back and back and back eventually you will get to the point were a guy was considered lineal champ but didnt actually beat a lineal champ...

true story...

i win this thread. thank you all for playing.

[Fox McCloud]

there are a few good points and flaws to your arguement.

true if a guy retires AS lineal champion then the titles are vacated and have to be won back and its true...the new lineal champion didnt beat the guy who was the champ before him...

however if you stick to that analysis then leneal champions would never exist...i mean who was the champion the day boxing officially became a sport? no one...

someone had to become the champion out of a big group of guys...

right? if you go back and back and back and back eventually you will get to the point were a guy was considered lineal champ but didnt actually beat a lineal champ...

true story...

i win this thread. thank you all for playing.

Damn, that is some sweet analysis if I have ever heard some.

[The_Italian]

Damn, that is some sweet analysis if I have ever heard some.

its true.

i mean who was THEE FIRST lineal champion? there wasnt...at least not out of the gate...they were all ranked and fought and the top 2 guys fought for the championship and thus became the first LINEAL champion.

In every division somewhere in the course of history i am absolutely certain that it hasnt all been, "beating the guy who beat the guy"...lineal champs retire, move up/down in weight...or otherwise.

it happens...

just like now with mayweather retiring (assuming he really is retiring) now cotto and margarito will be fighting for the lineal championship as cotto was the second best welterweight next to mayweather...and margarito wasnt 3rd but he wasnt THAT far behind) so logically these are 2 of (if not THEE) best welterweights still fighting...

so the winner will be the LINEAL champion even if mayweather wasnt beat.

[miron_lang]

You dont think Shane Mosley is the BEST Welterweight in those days?

[miron_lang]

1. That's called being arbitrary. The reality is that the line was broken when Leonard vacated. The #1 and #2 guys can fight any day and it doesn't make up for the fact that the belt was vacated, and they won a vacant belt.

2. Again, if you unify all the championships, you become an undisputed champ, not a linear champ.

This post shows that you simply dont like the
'Linear Championship' stuff.

If the champion vacates. The 2 best fighter square off for a new line. damn its very simple.

[miron_lang]

Then we don't have to talk about linear champions anymore. Call a guy "THE CHAMP" in any way you want it, be it a "Ring Belt", a box off between the #1 and #2 challengers, a tournament, an unbiased analysis of X or Y fighter's strengths and weaknesses... but please, don't sell me a fallacy just because it sounds good on paper.

There have been great champions, paper champions, undisputed champions, ATG champions... but linear champions died long ago.

Now i got your point.



maybe we just renamed the term "linear Champion" to "The Real Champion"

The fighter makes the belt, not the other way around.

question:

Do you consider Pac's victory over barrera a legitimate Featherweight championship?

[TheSurgeonMDMPH]

Just another weak ass attempt to discredit an Insignificant fighter. PBF is gone from the sport, LET IT GO!