Usyk is the true lineal, Fury is fraud

[billeau2]

It's 100% marketing.

Wladimir did not clean up and wouldn't ever have beaten his brother. Prime or not. It's a mismatch.

That's like saying Spence will never fight Crawford so Spence v Ennis is for lineal instead (slightly different concepts as they are not brothers). Nope, doesn't work like that. If you can't fight the arguably best guy in the division, and there is no lineal champion... You can't become one.

It's pure marketing nonsense.

No its not! It is the permability of the lineal! It has a fluid quality at times... Like you said in a previous post: eventually an undisputed comes along... In the meantime one can argue different interpretations for the title. Your defense of Vitalie is very creative. It has some merit, though I personally disagree. But the real strength of the lineal is in getting it resolved and in the hands of one heavyweight who has beaten the best previous fighter(s).

[billeau2]

Are Spence and Crawford blood related? Don’t be ridiculous.

It’s not marketing, whether you like it or not, Wladimir was recognised as lineal champion. He was the clear #1 in the division in the 2010’s.

His argument is compelling: it has merit. So... you get maybe ten guys who are diehard fans of heavyweight boxing... ten guys who have no agendas, but know the sport well... Your at the pub and the discussion of who the "best" Klit really was comes up... I guarantee you that most in the know pick Vitalie. That is the recognition that makes the lineal, the lineal. Vitalie also beat a common opponent that Vlad flubbed.

I happen to disagree with him, but the argument has considerable merit.

[M312]

Are Spence and Crawford blood related? Don’t be ridiculous.

It’s not marketing, whether you like it or not, Wladimir was recognised as lineal champion. He was the clear #1 in the division in the 2010’s.

Did I say they were? They are the number 1 and 2 though. Not sure which way - just the the Klitschkos.

You feel free to fall for the marketing scam.
Wladimir never unified all the belts or beat the number one/two... Ever.

He was never lineal.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

His argument is compelling: it has merit. So... you get maybe ten guys who are diehard fans of heavyweight boxing... ten guys who have no agendas, but know the sport well... Your at the pub and the discussion of who the "best" Klit really was comes up... I guarantee you that most in the know pick Vitalie. That is the recognition that makes the lineal, the lineal. Vitalie also beat a common opponent that Vlad flubbed.

I happen to disagree with him, but the argument has considerable merit.

I’m a Vitali over Wlad guy myself but by the early 2010’s Vitali had clearly slowed whilst Wladmir was still peaking until around 2015. Prime vs Prime I’d pick Vitali though.

Regardless, it doesn’t change the fact Wlad legitimately became lineal champion. I don’t think there was any argument Wlad was “the man” at HW up until Fury beat him.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Did I say they were? They are the number 1 and 2 though. Not sure which way - just the the Klitschkos.

You feel free to fall for the marketing scam.
Wladimir never unified all the belts or beat the number one/two... Ever.

He was never lineal.

You compared it to the Klitschko’s not fighting one another which is self explanatory. It was a ****** comparison.

He was lineal it’s a ostensibly a fact. Provide a legitimate source that doesn’t recognise Wlad as having a lineal reign.

[JakeTheBoxer]

Fury is irrelevant until he comes back and fights Usyk - Joshua 2 winner.

[M312]

This is an interesting comment. Undisputed champions are, in general, great for boxing, and as far as heavyweights go, great to straighten out the lineal.

It's impossible to have a TRUE lineal champion without unifying the belts. It's disputed who's number 1.

In Wladimirs case, most people who watched boxing at the time would have picked Vitali to beat him. Hell, most would've had Vitali winning years after retirement when Wladimir was at his peak.

[M312]

His argument is compelling: it has merit. So... you get maybe ten guys who are diehard fans of heavyweight boxing... ten guys who have no agendas, but know the sport well... Your at the pub and the discussion of who the "best" Klit really was comes up... I guarantee you that most in the know pick Vitalie. That is the recognition that makes the lineal, the lineal. Vitalie also beat a common opponent that Vlad flubbed.

I happen to disagree with him, but the argument has considerable merit.

It's not my argument.

Wladimir being lineal was always marketing at the time. In fact it was rarely/never used other than the Chageav fight because it was fake.

Tyson Fury just suddenly started using it when he had no belts to again market himself.

Actually, you follow the line... There hasn't been a lineal champion since Lewis. Just niave fans who fall for marketing say it (or hardcore Fury fans who believe every word he says)

[M312]

You compared it to the Klitschko’s not fighting one another which is self explanatory. It was a ****** comparison.

He was lineal it’s a ostensibly a fact. Provide a legitimate source that doesn’t recognise Wlad as having a lineal reign.

You continue being niave.

Wladimir never beat the next best boxer in the division, ever. I rate him very highly. But he was never undisputed or lineal other than some simple marketing for simple minds.

[Toffee]

So no legitimate sources then. Just your opinion.

Fury and Klitschko had both been inactive for the same amount of time so it’s difficult to rank one and not the other.

Even if you consider Fury retired, I’d have rated a prime Wilder and prime AJ as the consensus 1 & 2 rather than a 41 year old who hadn’t recorded a win in over 2 years. No disrespect to Wlad, he was, and I emphasise was, a great champion but by 2017 he was a semi retired, middle aged HW who’d been visibly declining for years.

I know you love AJ and can’t stand Fury but to suggest Fury isn’t the current lineal champion is laughable. You won’t find one reputable source that supports your argument.

Of course it's all opinion. Just as yours is that Wilder was top 2 in April 2017. In my opinion there's no chance you could rate Wilder above Klitschko or Joshua - at that point Wilder had fought no-one. His decision against Stiverne was his only decent win and he was coming off a win over Gerald Washington.

It's not inconsistent to rank Klitschko but not Fury. It's entirely reasonable. One was in camp for 18 months, trying to fight his rematch, and booking a title fight. The other was retired, banned and 25 stone. I don't need sources to inform that view - I'm basing it on what we both know actually happened.

LIneal is opinion (until they all fight watch other and sort it). I'm not sure which reputable source I would need. TBRB made a poor decision to unrank Wlad who was clearly actively seeking a fight (their words, by the way. They said he was not actively seeking fights and unranked him a couple of weeks before the Joshua fight was announced, which demonstrates that they were incorrect). Ring? Well they're not reputable in this debate - Fury still had their belt until 2018!