How is Tyson Fury the Lineal Champion?

[Mitchell Kane]

I’ve always found the discussion of the “lineal” belt to be largely meaningless.

I mean, if we just go back to the 90’s … it was tarnished by Foreman’s controversial decision over Schulz and lack of a rematch … and then Briggs won it with just as controversial a win over Foreman.

The belt gained a lot of meaning after Lewis beat Briggs …. then won the unified titles from Holyfield.

But was Lewis winning the lineal title somehow more important than him winning the unified titles?

Not even close.

So just like every other title in the sport, it can be subject to circumstances and controversies.

It’s better to just use common sense instead of hold the “lineal” belt up as some be all and and end all of who’s a champion.

[Marchegiano]

Lineal is older than ratings.....so....modern made up bull**** is your answer. You get a few flavors of made up bull**** as outline in the opening post, but, that is all it is. **** en****** like Ring and TBRB pulled out of thin air to justify their stance of lineal.

Check this out:

I was hoping somebody could clarify because I only see two ways and neither appears valid.

1) Fury becomes lineal after beating Klitschko, retires for three years and returns with his status being upheld regardless of his absence which is bogus or;

2) in Dec 2018 Fury vs Wilder I was considered the establishment of a new lineage with both men being rated #1 and #2? In Dec 2018 Joshua had the WBO, WBA, IBF, belts with wins over Klitschko, Povetkin, Parker, White, Takam which surpasses anything Wilder had done so did the whore RING magazine have Wilder rated at 1 or 2 at that point in time?

1A) Wlad being lineal based on Chagaev was some **** Ring pulled out of their ass. Who was the rated 2 to John L? Exactly, John L's title has **** all to do with 1 and 2.

1B) Fury retiring and returning as champion has more precedence than 1 vs 2 = lineal bull****. Corbett was the last to do it prior to sanctioning bodies ruling retirements as end of reigns.


2A) Fury vs Wilder is more 1 vs 2 made up nonsense that has nothing to do with the title that existed before ratings existed and everything to do, again, with en****** like Ring and TBRB justifying their opinions. If you really want me to flex on this, who is John L's 2. His whole career, name one rated 2. How about Corbett? Fitzs? Jeffries? Johnson? I think you'll find the first lineal champion to fight a rated competitor is Dempsey and the NBA's ratings. You know, during the era when people were fed up with lineal traditional **** and wanted a ruling authority for boxing. This distinction is retroactively applied, in Dempsey's day no one gave a **** about lineal. His era was the era of killing lineal for a superior rule driven structure. Dempsey's a proud champion, NBA/NYSAC, he gave 0 ****s about lineal.

2B) Joshua was doing very well but EVERY justification in this is Ring made up bull****. Homie you ain't wrong here, you're wrong believing any of the other nonsense. Wlad was only lineal because Ring said so, not because he won lineal in a manner champions used to win lineal back before sanctioning body belts were invented. Fury was made lineal because he beat Wlad who is a BS lineal, stripping him is distinctly anti-lineal but no one knows that so take your pick as to whether or not it's "bogus". If you do strip him, which is made up nonsense justification with no historical backing, then you may as well be able to reassert him as lineal off Wilder given you are now well deep into pulling **** out of yer ass and calling it tradition.





Here's the big truth you're missing bud. Before bodies boxing was an even bigger mess. You won't find 1 vs 2 before ratings existed, which starts in the 20s, so how did they win a vacant lineal? Well, the past champion could just elect the next champion, no fight needed. The past champion could also elect two to fight for his belt. The past champion could decide nevermind, I am still champion, until he loses in the ring. That sort of **** is why people wanted sanctioning bodies. It is also why Ring uses sanctioning body inventions to justify their stances. All historical, pre-body, champions elected their challengers. Jem Ward retired and return as champion no less than 5 times. Tom Spring never fought for the title it was just handed to him. People got tired of **** like that and wanted a system where the champion just picked the next guy, or fight, or even after picking a next could decide nevermind and strip dudes who had been called champions for years. This is recorded too, when Corbett retired Fitzs won his vacant belt. Then Corbett came back and Corbett was champion, Fitzs had to beat him to be champion. Fitzs' first reign is recognized by no one. Because lineal is bull****. How were challengers selected for a defending champion without a rating system you may ask. The champion simply chose his challengers. Yup, imagine that, imagine Fury just picking anyone and there you go, that's a defense. You can see why in a world where that is all there is people would want something like bodies.

So bodies come and everything is great until like the 40s, by the 60s the divisions between are so strong folks start to want lineal back. Then **** comes up like how do you deal with a vacancy and since the truth about how lineal actually worked is some ****ed up ****** bull**** that would have Lennox Lewis still as champion right now Ring takes some rules that came from sanctioning bodies, elects themselves as judge, and applies these rules to modern situations.

So you end up telling people Wlad had John L Sullivan's belt because he was 1 and he beat 2 without any sense of how mixed up that statement actually is.



Edit - en***** means ent ity . Reckon it got stard out because it has tit in it.

[BangEM]

Fury is the lineal champ of the Wladimir Klitschko lineage.

But Wlad was never a lineal champion.

The lineal ended with Lennox Lewis after his retirement.

And there has been no undisputed champ to start a new lineage.

[Shadoww702]

Fury also is the ONLY 2 Time Champ that has never lost a fight....

[ShoulderRoll]

But Wlad was never a lineal champion.

The lineal ended with Lennox Lewis after his retirement.

And there has been no undisputed champ to start a new lineage.

But Klitschko was the best heavyweight of his time and had a long reign. Fury is the lineal champion of that specific lineage.

No two ways about it. That can't be denied.

[Toffee]

But Klitschko was the best heavyweight of his time and had a long reign. Fury is the lineal champion of that specific lineage.

No two ways about it. That can't be denied.

Your 'Klitschko lineage' approach means we can have multiple lineal champion claims at points in time.

Who was the lineal champion prior to the Fight of the Century? Was it Frazier with the Frazier lineage or was it Ali with the Patterson lineage?

Presumably Marciano still held the Charles lineage? And Louis the Schmelling lineage?

What claim does Usyk have for the Joshua lineage? Or is there also a vacant lineage?

There's a point when this all comes together. History sorts it out. The rest is just all possibilities in the current era.

[KingGilgamesh]

It has been broken many times. The 'lineal championship" is a marketing ploy. Who did Wlad win it off? He collected most of the belts but there is no connecting him to John L Sullivan lineally. You cant even connect him to Lennox Lewis that way. No one in the last 60+ years atleast has beat the man who beat the man who beat the man..etc. It is a given title by I dont know who now, Ring magazine I guess.

Pretty sure Wlads brother had it, Vitali. But he left boxing in 2013 so it was only logical that Wlad would be the next one. Especially considering both brothers vowed never to fight one another.

[Pigeons]

I was hoping somebody could clarify because I only see two ways and neither appears valid.

1) Fury becomes lineal after beating Klitschko, retires for three years and returns with his status being upheld regardless of his absence which is bogus or;

2) in Dec 2018 Fury vs Wilder I was considered the establishment of a new lineage with both men being rated #1 and #2? In Dec 2018 Joshua had the WBO, WBA, IBF, belts with wins over Klitschko, Povetkin, Parker, White, Takam which surpasses anything Wilder had done so did the whore RING magazine have Wilder rated at 1 or 2 at that point in time?

Really weird to see an internet account dedicated to boxxy fandom in 2021. That shit ended at least a decade ago.

[Sun_Tzu]

Pretty sure Wlads brother had it, Vitali. But he left boxing in 2013 so it was only logical that Wlad would be the next one. Especially considering both brothers vowed never to fight one another.

Ive been quoted twice in this thread and I dont think I was understood. For Tyson Fury to be the Lineal HW Chmpion there would have to be a clear line of succession unbroken from John L Sullivan all the way to Fury himself. There isnt, its not even close. Lennox Lewis wasnt the Lineal Champion nor was Tyson or Larry Holmes or even Ali. It has been fractured countless times. I have no problem with everyone agreeing on one universal champion that stands over all the other belt holders if there are any but you cant be the lineal champion. Its impossible at this point. To me if a guy unifies all the major belts (WBA,IBF,WBC,WBO) thats the champ but other instances could qualify. The whole he beat the man who beat the man who beat the man thing is a marketing thing, its not been true for probably over 100 years.

[Robbie Barrett]

Fury also is the ONLY 2 Time Champ that has never lost a fight....

Only one to lose it by being banned for steroids too.