Tyson Fury or Wladimir Klitschko were Never Really "Lineal" Champ? Dead title?

[JakeTheBoxer]

Fury is not lineal, even Fury fans are not ****** enough to believe this.

After beating Klitschko he cowardly retired for two years to avoid a drug ban or a rematch. He came back fighting Pianeta and Seferi.

No, Fury has been a champ since beating Wilder 2020.

[BKM-]

I disagree (big surprise).
There is no ambiguity regarding the lineage of the Heavyweight boxing title, nor any cogent challenge to it's validity.

For the many "Los Banditos" titles, and the reasons why they strip them and bestow them with great (wild) impunity, there is plenty of wiggle room. But not with lineage.

One problem, in essence, is that having more than one caretaker for a world championship, be it a newspaper, trade magazine, athletic commission or an independent, for-profit company such as the alphabet organizations; is that having two or more designators inherently demands competition; while conversely, the core purpose of even declaring a Champion is to distinguish One.
Needless to say, this creates a conflict in methodology.
In American football they had this issue many years ago, and solved it in 1967 with Super Bowl 1.

The issue today is that this duality has existed now for so long, that younger fans know nothing else. To them, this is the dark ages, and actual history is frowned upon. Boxing's contribution to "cancel culture ", we might suppose.
The self serving and absurdity corrupt WBA, WBC, IBF, etc, have miraculously gained acceptance and influence soley by attrition, aided greatly by the presumptive correlation between boxing fan types and people failing to turn in their homework.
Lineage in the weight protected divisions is too convoluted to unravel back to their respective beginnings. But for the Alpha class, that man who beat the man line with uncontested mendings when a champion retires is crystal clear, unimpeachable, often published and widely regarded.

Shall I go on? This is Boxing 101, and should be taken as an oath well before any adult forms their first opinion about boxing.

Please tell me you got a british accent to boot and are writing these posts sitting next to your open fireplace with a glass of wine nearby.

No offense or anything, I was enjoying your back and forth with Dan B.

[kafkod]

There's DEFINITELY a thing called a lineal title. Lineal has a meaning. Title has a meaning. Those things combined mean something.

That said it has been perversed over time, but it has nothing to do with Wlad or Fury. It got fooked up a 100yrs ago when Jim Jefferies retired or at least when Gene Tunney retired (if you wanna give Jack Johnson credit for winning it by beating a 6yr retired Jefferies). Its been a subjective "lineal" title for a century.

Thank you.
I do miss the point sometimes. I blame it on age.
So if you will, remind me. What is the point?

The point is that the lineal title is only "a thing" in the minds of people who think about it. Outside of the minds of the people who think and talk about Tyson Fury, his lineal title does not exist, which means his claim to be the lineal champ can be contested by people who have different ideas about it.

But Fury's WBC title is more than just an idea. It has objective, legal, and factual existence. It is objective because he owns a WBC title belt - which exists as a physical object in the real world. That belt has his name engraved upon it, and it was awarded to him by the WBC, who are only people with the legal right to award or withdraw recognition of the WBC title. These are facts, which mean that no rational person can contest Fury's right to call himself the WBC champion. But his right to call himself the lineal champion can be contested and is being contested right here in this thread!

[paulf]

But Fury's WBC title is more than just an idea. It has objective, legal, and factual existence. It is objective because he owns a WBC title belt - which exists as a physical object in the real world. That belt has his name engraved upon it, and it was awarded to him by the WBC, who are only people with the legal right to award or withdraw recognition of the WBC title. These are facts, which mean that no rational person can contest Fury's right to call himself the WBC champion. But his right to call himself the lineal champion can be contested and is being contested right here in this thread!

Yeah bingo, that why I was saying there is no such thing as a lineal heavyweight champion - It's based solely on people's opinion, and people can disagree.

So when Fat Dan was shilling for ESPN going around saying "Tyson Fury is THE. LINEAL. HEAVYWEIGHT. CHAMPION. IT'S A FACT." after Fury had been retired for years following his failed drug tests and Wlad and Joshua had fought for all his belts, it's like.... nah man, that's just your opinion.

My opinion is a guy that failed drug tests and vacated his belts to avoid being stripped is not the champion of anything. Usyk is obviously the champ, Fury will be the champ if he beats Usyk.

If you have a differing opinion, that's cool. But this is all just people's opinions.

[kafkod]

Yeah bingo, that why I was saying there is no such thing as a lineal heavyweight champion - It's based solely on people's opinion, and people can disagree.

So when Fat Dan was shilling for ESPN going around saying "Tyson Fury is THE. LINEAL. HEAVYWEIGHT. CHAMPION. IT'S A FACT." after Fury had been retired for years following his failed drug tests and Wlad and Joshua had fought for all his belts, it's like.... nah man, that's just your opinion.

My opinion is a guy that failed drug tests and vacated his belts to avoid being stripped is not the champion of anything. Usyk is obviously the champ, Fury will be the champ if he beats Usyk.

If you have a differing opinion, that's cool. But this is all just people's opinions.

Absolutely. There is a lineage, which is a historical record of HW champions from John L to the present day. But there has never been any such thing as a lineal title or a lineal champion, in any objective sense, since Rocky Marciano retired undefeated back in the 1950s and broke the man-who-beat-the-man chain for ever.

[Willow The Wisp]

The point is that the lineal title is only "a thing" in the minds of people who think about it. Outside of the minds of the people who think and talk about Tyson Fury, his lineal title does not exist, which means his claim to be the lineal champ can be contested by people who have different ideas about it.

But Fury's WBC title is more than just an idea. It has objective, legal, and factual existence. It is objective because he owns a WBC title belt - which exists as a physical object in the real world. That belt has his name engraved upon it, and it was awarded to him by the WBC, who are only people with the legal right to award or withdraw recognition of the WBC title. These are facts, which mean that no rational person can contest Fury's right to call himself the WBC champion. But his right to call himself the lineal champion can be contested and is being contested right here in this thread!

I acknowledge the basis of your thinking. A belt being a tactile thing, and lineage being based on past history and tradition.
But do you fully understand the relationship between federal law and boxing's sanctioning bodies?
I do. Very, very well.
You are free to put your trust in whomever you like.

The ABC titles are real and the history isn't.
Who but the flat earth society could ever imagine that we'd ever get to this point?

[Willow The Wisp]

Fury is not lineal, even Fury fans are not ****** enough to believe this.

After beating Klitschko he cowardly retired for two years to avoid a drug ban or a rematch. He came back fighting Pianeta and Seferi.

No, Fury has been a champ since beating Wilder 2020.

You didn't read the link so you're still just guessing in the dark. And wrongly.

[Willow The Wisp]

Absolutely. There is a lineage, which is a historical record of HW champions from John L to the present day. But there has never been any such thing as a lineal title or a lineal champion, in any objective sense, since Rocky Marciano retired undefeated back in the 1950s and broke the man-who-beat-the-man chain for ever.

You also didn't read the link so you're still just guessing in the dark. And wrongly.

Why Marciano? Why not Tunney?

There's no debate going on here. Simply a remedial education, where those who flunk return to the fields.

[Spray_resistant]

Wlad was most certainly lineal or the real true and clear HW champion of the world by beating the best available opponents at the time other than of course his big bro part time WBC champion. Fury won their fight making him the real or lineal champion then retired thus vacating any title claim legitimate/official or subjective.

[kafkod]

I acknowledge the basis of your thinking. A belt being a tactile thing, and lineage being based on past history and tradition.
But do you fully understand the relationship between federal law and boxing's sanctioning bodies?
I do. Very, very well.
You are free to put your trust in whomever you like.

The ABC titles are real and the history isn't.
Who but the flat earth society could ever imagine that we'd ever get to this point?

History is real in the sense that what happened, happened. But the significance of what happened is open to debate. Who holds which ABC title is not open to debate. Fury being the WBC champion is an objective fact, which no-one can argue with. Fury being the lineal champion is a subjective opinion, which can be argued with.