Manny Pacquiao Won ONLY 4 Major Belts?

[loui_ludwig]

alphabet titles are still real titles. Ring Magazine isn't..

And why is that?

[Fights]

Forget all the belt crap...

DLH had popularity from the start, so he was able offer a weak champion at SFW enough $$$ to fight him, and get himself an easy title that way. It's easier for big names to get ABC titles, but it doesn't tell the full story. You have to look at who they beat to win the belts.

You're right. You can also argue that we have more weight divisions now compared to another era.

BUT, it's NOT that easy to get 4 or more alphabelts in different divisions.

It would involve hard work, politics, luck, and greatness to do so today, that's why ONLY a few can do it.

[Alibata]

And why is that?

I think he means to say that David Diaz is more of a legit champion at 135 than Mab was at 126 or Hatton was at 140 because he had a "legitimate" alphabet belt. Linear title would have the better fighter attached to it and thus the much greater accomplishment. Why do you think only 1 person has ever been able to do it; Manny Pacquiao in the long history of these divisions.

[dugongpinoy]

I think he means to say that David Diaz is more of a legit champion at 135 than Mab was at 126 or Hatton was at 140 because he had a legitimate alphabet belt. Linear title would have the better fighter attached to it.

No that is not what he meant... What he really meant was, I hate Pacman and I'll do everything to discredit all his win and titles and belts..

[Pullcounter]

the ring belt is as legit as any of the other alphabet belts; the only difference is that you don't have to pay the sanctioning fee

[Alibata]

No that is not what he meant... What he really meant was, I hate Pacman and I'll do everything to discredit all his win and titles and belts..

He can't discredit anything. The fact is that only one man has been able to do that. Many have captured multiple alphabets. But only one man has got 4 lineal belts. He can talk all he wants but his opinion is a lonely opinion.

[Fights]

alphabet titles are still real titles. Ring Magazine isn't..

Yes, there is an inherent problem with lineal title. The lineal champion is described as "the man who beat the man". But what if the man who beats a man got lucky?

Like Douglas beating Tyson, or Briggs beating Foreman? They are lesser fighters sure, but do they deserve the lineal title?

Some would argue yes, some would say no. Modern lineal championship is merely a notional title tracked by fans and boxing journalists, so there is no money or organization to arrange such.

That's why Ring Magazine's attempt to legitimize the so called "lineal" is admirable.

[KILLA RIGHT]

All this belt talk is bull****.if you go by the real belts he has 4. But then again these days how much does it mean to beat david diaz and get a b.s belt

[W1LLPOW3R]

The Ring Magazine is just someone's freakin' opinion. Like them or not the sanctioning bodies determine champs..this has nothing to do with Pac's accomplishments..i think we should count belts only when the titles are actually at stake..

[Alibata]

Yes, there is an inherent problem with lineal title. The lineal champion is described as "the man who beat the man". But what if the man who beats a man got lucky?

Like Douglas beating Tyson, or Briggs beating Foreman? They are lesser fighters sure, but do they deserve the lineal title?

Some would argue yes, some would say no. Modern lineal championship is merely a notional title tracked by fans and boxing journalists, so there is no money or organization to arrange such.

That's why Ring Magazine's attempt to legitimize the so called "lineal" is admirable.

No luck in boxing. douglas didn't just beat tyson he worked for it and thus, Holyfield was the successor of the lineal tradition carried out in boxing by beating douglas. Douglas was a more legit champion than David Diaz.