The Klitschko’s Rule Heavyweight, What’s The Bad News?

[crold1]

No, I don't and your insistence on this is a waste of time. His first BC reign was not lineal for sure but...

Lewis beat Briggs, who beat Foreman (on the cards anyways), who beat Moorer, who beat Holy, who beat Bowe, who beat Holy, who beat Douglas, who beat Tyson...on and on in a straight line to Patterson. That's the definition of a lineal champion. here's a link to an online encyclopedia I use for references though it's really not needed here: http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/achamp.htm

OR

He unified the BC, BA and BF belts at a time when the BO belt was NOT considered a serious Heavyweight title AT ALL. Even Wlad, with the BO belt, talked about Lewis as THE real champ. Regardless of sanc body nonsense (and the BA didn't want to strip Lewis for Ruiz; they agreed to let him keep the belt if he agreed to face Ruiz after Grant, who was more deserving at the time anyways, and Lewis did so only to lose the title in court), he then defended against Grant and Tua in 2000 (Tua, who knocked Ruiz out in about a second and who was the most deserving contender of them all at the time) and on and on...

He was THE lineal champion.

I can admit I may have errored in pluralizing Vit's injury last week...surely you can let this argument go in the face of actual facts.

[Stickman]

I just had a funny thought....wouldn't it be hillarious if Wlad, rather than having his opponents sign a rematch clause before accepting a fight with a challenger, he had his opponents agree to take on Vitali in the event Wlad lost? I don't know why, but that thought just cracked me the **** up.

What's even funnier is wondering if how many of those would decline to fight Wlad if they knew they'd face his brother if they won.

[Stickman]

Povetkin will make the double-Klitschko reign short-lived.

One post, and that's the extent of what you have to say?


Oh no, of course you're not an ALT.

[Guest]

I just had a funny thought....wouldn't it be hillarious if Wlad, rather than having his opponents sign a rematch clause before accepting a fight with a challenger, he had his opponents agree to take on Vitali in the event Wlad lost? I don't know why, but that thought just cracked me the **** up.

What's even funnier is wondering if how many of those would decline to fight Wlad if they knew they'd face his brother if they won.

So we would call this the Corrie Sanders Mandate, right?

[crold1]

Povetkin beats Wlad and I'll be surprised...he needs at least 4-5 more fights first IMO

[gridiron]

gridiron

In any other sport, there is only one world champion at the time – and there can only be one. In today’s heavyweight division we have four (including two WBA champs). If we have four, why can’t we have eight … or sixteen? It’s ridiculous that we submit to the alphabet organisations. Vitali, how great boxer he ever is, is not a world champ, but a WBC champ. What he’s done is paying an expensive sanction fee for a cheap belt, so that Mr. Sulaiman can live luxury life for another day.

[UTFISH]

It doesn't matter if there is a singular champion right now. The Klitschkos are clearly #1 & #2. One of them will get the WBA belt in 2009, if Valuev and/or Chagaev don't duck them. At that point all the sanctioning belts can be thrown in the trash, where they belong, and any heavy who wants to be considered the champ or get the biggest paydays will have to go through them. Expect the Klitschko era to last at least 2 years until Vitali retires, then there will be a singular champ again.

[Stickman]

In any other sport, there is only one world champion at the time – and there can only be one. In today’s heavyweight division we have four (including two WBA champs). If we have four, why can’t we have eight … or sixteen? It’s ridiculous that we submit to the alphabet organisations. Vitali, how great boxer he ever is, is not a world champ, but a WBC champ. What he’s done is paying an expensive sanction fee for a cheap belt, so that Mr. Sulaiman can live luxury life for another day.

If that's the case (and I agree, largely), then there should only be ONE GODDAMNED TITLE. I've felt this way since I was a kid, but for some reason the rest of the world just won't agree to do things my way.

Just think about it, though...if there were a single title, there would be a continuous battle between contenders to get into position as the challenger. Rather than one or two fights a year, I think these guys would be fighting 4 times a year or more, trying to get rid of every man standing between them and THE belt......Only in a perfect world, says I.

[gridiron]

gridiron

In a perfect world, nobilities such as Boxing News, The Ring, Boxing Monthly, *********.com would work together unifying their ratings. A monthly statement which couldn’t be ignored.

[Pullcounter]

VK has his old belt back, but Wlad is still the top HW. All this bitchin about needin a HW champ is old and ******ed. Even without bein undisputed, Wlad has established himself as the man and has been on top for a while now. Even if he had all the belts the fights at HW would still be largely dull and between a bunch of Euro cats that many fans wouldn't be interested in. People should just let it go already. Nothin wrong wit the bros runnin **** together, even tho VK is like the 'vice' HW champ or whatever.

i dunno. vitaly was the heir to lewis before wlad was. the only way to settle it is for the bros to fight, but that's never gonna happen. there will never be an undisputed champion at HW until one of these guys beats the other or loses and the other bro fights the winner.