Why there is only One Heavyweight Champion

[Willow The Wisp]

I'll leave that to you.

I had nothing to do with compiling that timeline, newbie. Zero. LOL. It's the history of the Heavyweight Championship of the world and you can research that yourself by reading a book. Read a book.

Know your subject BEFORE constructing an opinion on it.

It's what separates the people who know what they're talking about from the people who just talk.


The Heavyweight Championship and the promotional tool used to lend importance to a show between contenders (Sanctioning bodies) are not the same thing. It is confusing for a reason. To create suckers.

Personally, I've got no skin in the game, beyond trying to give anyone wanting to understand boxing via the history some essential information.
Google any name on the list and advance your understanding, or don't.

Who'd clean the toilets if it weren't for those remaining uninterested in a better suite of understanding?

Just troll. That's cool too.

[kafkod]

I had nothing to do with compiling that timeline, newbie. Zero. LOL. It's the history of the Heavyweight Championship of the world and you can research that yourself by reading a book. Read a book.

Know your subject BEFORE constructing an opinion on it.

It's what separates the people who know what they're talking about from the people who just talk.


The Heavyweight Championship and the promotional tool used to lend importance to a show between contenders (Sanctioning bodies) are not the same thing. It is confusing for a reason. To create suckers.

Personally, I've got no skin in the game, beyond trying to give anyone wanting to understand boxing via the history some essential information.
Google any name on the list and advance your understanding, or don't.

Who'd clean the toilets if it weren't for those remaining uninterested in a better suite of understanding?

Just troll. That's cool too.

"Know your subject BEFORE constructing an opinion on it."

Says the guy who doesn't know that Aries was the Greek god of war and that Heracles and Theseus are heroes from Greek mythology, not historical boxing champions.

[Marchegiano]

I made a mistake and did not read carefully. Rather than being a ****, let me try to contribute.


Apollo is a the god of boxing, not Aries. I think it's cool to include legends into the mix so I'm not bothered by the godliness, just, it's the wrong god. Apollo invented boxing under the dominion of beauty. Aries challenged, and claimed boxing was for war. Apollo fought and defeated Aries for the title God of Boxing at the first Olympic games. This legend at least reveals to us even ancient greeks found art in boxing.


I think you'll find Photion is not the last ancient champion and indeed his reign ended nearly 200 years before the end of ancient boxing.

Photion of Ephesos - 173, 197, & 201 AD

Horus of Egypt - 364 AD

Varazdat of Armenia - 385 AD

Banned by Theodosius I in 393 AD



Also, who is "buck"?

Is "stokes" Elizabeth? Her husband? Just coincidence?

[Willow The Wisp]

"Know your subject BEFORE constructing an opinion on it."

Says the guy who doesn't know that Aries was the Greek god of war and that Heracles and Theseus are heroes from Greek mythology, not historical boxing champions.

Again my friend, not my list. Reach out to any of the Universities listed if you need to. Your uphill debate is with them, not me.

What I expect that you will learn is that the tradition of the title from the Greeks begins with mythological figues who interacted with humanity, in the style of the histoical telling used by the ancient Greeks. You will find that the segue to humans alone and nothing but, is completed by the time of Onomastos of Smytha:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onomastus_of_Smyrna

That is a very minor point you've become hung up on, and little to do with the lineage of the title, it's singularity and it's place in human history; unless 688 BC isn't far back enough for you to make the case?

It might be that non ranked prospect Vyacheslav Glazkov falling and hurting his right knee, handing the esteemed IBF "Heavyweight championship of the world" to one Charles Martin in 2016 holds equal meaning for you, and that's OK.

You can't make a person think.

Now, the IBF title, which came into some level of legitimacy as aforementioned, is no more or less "Official" than any other sanctioning body bauble, and the late Bobby Lee, an acquaintance of mine, really was trying to do something good with it, initially. (Long story).

We should all try to be a little silly sometimes.

[Toffee]

Let's accept that there is a Lineal Champion.

Fury's actions as Lineal Champion include:

• Didn't undertake a contractual rematch
• Went on a 2 year coke and booze binge
• Popped for PEDs and was banned
• Retired at least twice
• 'Defended' his status against Pianeta, Seferi, Schwarz, Chisora... and now a 37 year old debutant

If that's what it takes to be Lineal Champion, then is it even worth taking about?

With this act, fans of the sport were reminded that the fighters and their FIGHTS matter more

Exactly. Lineal status used to better than the orgs. Under Fury, it isn't. The orgs aren't great, but they at least maintain some standards... they stripped him, they made him fight an actual ranked boxer.

Conclusion: Lineal isn't worth anything unless the fighters respect it.

[Marchegiano]

Conclusion: Lineal isn't worth anything unless the fighters respect it.

Truth

Fury isn't the first one or the worst one, but yeah, he has shown lineal has only as much value as you make it.


I have no problem with the full list of lineal champions stretching back to ancients. It's good way for fans to see the connections between ancient, enlightenment, and modern boxing and bringing up **** like retirement, to me, is very similar to pointing out King Chuck ain't the great, great, so on, grandson of Bill the OG or that England in 1066 is very different to England in 2023. Just misses the point and historical importance. Most fan believe 18th century pugilism is a totally different sport ... The UK ain't exactly 1066 old either, get me?

That said, historical understanding and conceptualization does not give lineal an inherent value. Not IMO anyway.



I don't love the bodies either, but on the whole and over the entire course of boxing history, the bodies have been better than lineal. There's a reason why bodies were created, why they have always had mandos, and why they rank fighters.


Same for TBRB/Ring. Ain't worth a ****. Who is the TBRB mando? Alright, not worth a ****.

[kafkod]

Again my friend, not my list. Reach out to any of the Universities listed if you need to. Your uphill debate is with them, not me.

What I expect that you will learn is that the tradition of the title from the Greeks begins with mythological figues who interacted with humanity, in the style of the histoical telling used by the ancient Greeks. You will find that the segue to humans alone and nothing but, is completed by the time of Onomastos of Smytha:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onomastus_of_Smyrna

That is a very minor point you've become hung up on, and little to do with the lineage of the title, it's singularity and it's place in human history; unless 688 BC isn't far back enough for you to make the case?

It might be that non ranked prospect Vyacheslav Glazkov falling and hurting his right knee, handing the esteemed IBF "Heavyweight championship of the world" to one Charles Martin in 2016 holds equal meaning for you, and that's OK.

You can't make a person think.

Now, the IBF title, which came into some level of legitimacy as aforementioned, is no more or less "Official" than any other sanctioning body bauble, and the late Bobby Lee, an acquaintance of mine, really was trying to do something good with it, initially. (Long story).

We should all try to be a little silly sometimes.

"Again my friend, not my list. Reach out to any of the Universities listed if you need to. Your uphill debate is with them, not me."

Context is everything. I don't know where you got that list from or by whom and for what purpose it was compiled. But I do know that it has no place in any rational discussion about the historical lineage of world HW boxing champions.

"You will find that the segue to humans alone and nothing but, is completed by the time of Onomastos of Smytha"

No mythological heroes, deities or supernatural beings of any kind have ever competed in a historical boxing match, so any list of historical world HW champions should contain the names of humans only. John L Sullivan was the first universally recognised world HW champ, Lennox Lewis was the last. There has been no universally recognised champ since Lennox retired.

"It might be that non ranked prospect Vyacheslav Glazkov falling and hurting his right knee, handing the esteemed IBF "Heavyweight championship of the world" to one Charles Martin in 2016 holds equal meaning for you, and that's OK."

Glazkov and Martin again? I don't understand why you keep ****ing on about that fight. How Charles Martin came to hold the IBF title has no bearing whatsoever on Tyson Fury's claim to be the imaginary lineal champion.

[kafkod]

I made a mistake and did not read carefully. Rather than being a ****, let me try to contribute.


Apollo is a the god of boxing, not Aries. I think it's cool to include legends into the mix so I'm not bothered by the godliness, just, it's the wrong god. Apollo invented boxing under the dominion of beauty. Aries challenged, and claimed boxing was for war. Apollo fought and defeated Aries for the title God of Boxing at the first Olympic games. This legend at least reveals to us even ancient greeks found art in boxing.


I think you'll find Photion is not the last ancient champion and indeed his reign ended nearly 200 years before the end of ancient boxing.

Photion of Ephesos - 173, 197, & 201 AD

Horus of Egypt - 364 AD

Varazdat of Armenia - 385 AD

Banned by Theodosius I in 393 AD



Also, who is "buck"?

Is "stokes" Elizabeth? Her husband? Just coincidence?

The ancient Greeks found art in everything, which is why their culture inspires us to this day. As a boxing fan, the story of Apollo, the God of poetry, defeating Aries the god of war, in a boxing match is kind of inspiring.

[M312]

Nobody disputes that Fury is the lineal heavyweight champion. That’s effectively what you’re saying

There is somewhat a debate over who the no.1 fighter is (I.e. the best heavyweight), though Fury is probably the clear favourite. The Lineal Championship, by design, doesn’t tell you who the best fighter of the day is, only that a lineage exists to someone who once was. The flaw in the system is that it cannot factor deterioration of a fighters rating over time, until he’s been beaten

No one disputes?

Obviously too young to know that Wladimir was never a true lineal champion.

The whole thing is a marketing ploy for those who don't know or easily forget.

[kafkod]

Let's accept that there is a Lineal Champion.

Fury's actions as Lineal Champion include:

• Didn't undertake a contractual rematch
• Went on a 2 year coke and booze binge
• Popped for PEDs and was banned
• Retired at least twice
• 'Defended' his status against Pianeta, Seferi, Schwarz, Chisora... and now a 37 year old debutant

If that's what it takes to be Lineal Champion, then is it even worth taking about?



Exactly. Lineal status used to better than the orgs. Under Fury, it isn't. The orgs aren't great, but they at least maintain some standards... they stripped him, they made him fight an actual ranked boxer.

Conclusion: Lineal isn't worth anything unless the fighters respect it.

Lineal is worth only as much as promoters can bamboozle fans into believing it's worth.