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

[F!x]

The lineal champ is a sort of fantasy claim-to-fame that Tyson Fury has flaunted since he beat Wladimir Klitschko. It was supposed to be the man who beat the man going all the way back through boxing history. But that chain has been broken several times in the past.

Lennox Lewis was regarded as a genuine lineal champ after beating Shannon Briggs in 1998. After Briggs, Lewis also beat two other previous lineal champs Mike Tyson and Evander Holyfield over the next 4 years. So the man who beat the man chain from Lewis goes back over 40 years to Rocky Marciano, who retired undefeated in 1955. Lewis retired as world champ in 2004. He was never beaten by Wladimir Klitschko, or Vitali for that matter.

3 years later in 2007, Wladimir was handed the lineal title after he beat Ruslan Chagaev. That's the same Chagaev who would get beaten and retired by Lucas Browne 7 years later. And Lucas Browne would later get beat by Dave Allen.

So after Fury beat Wladimir he proudly called himself "lineal" champ but it barely has any substance to it. Wladimir never beat the previous lineal champ Lennox Lewis. Granted, Wladimir was a good champ but did he deserve lineal for beating Chagaev or for his heavyweight reign? That's where things become subjective and open to personal opinion, instead of based on the actual boxing history of the man who beat the man.

So does the lineal title even exist anymore or did the retirement of Lennox Lewis also mean the end of the lineal title?

[dan-b]

It's a dubious and subjective concept. Even before the chain was broken with Lewis' retirement the "lineal" distinction had passed from Ali to Holmes in less than ideal circumstances.

Much like the "undisputed" marketing tool, or use of the term "GOAT", it's a search for absolute certainty which can only ever be a mirage.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

It’s easy to discredit the lineal title as there will inevitably be gaps in the lineage.

However when the alternative is these ABC orgs that have given the likes of Charles Martin, Manual Charr, Lucas Browne etc the title of Heavyweight Champion in recent years. I’ll take the lineal title all day.

[dan-b]

It’s easy to discredit the lineal title as there will inevitably be gaps in the lineage.

However when the alternative is these ABC orgs that have given the likes of Charles Martin, Manual Charr, Lucas Browne etc the title of Heavyweight Champion in recent years. I’ll take the lineal title all day.

It's not a title though, it's at best a distinction. What are the set criteria for establishing new lineage?

The alternative is not corrupt sanctioning bodies but an independent, impartial rankings committee like the TBRB.

[Toffee]

It’s easy to discredit the lineal title as there will inevitably be gaps in the lineage.

However when the alternative is these ABC orgs that have given the likes of Charles Martin, Manual Charr, Lucas Browne etc the title of Heavyweight Champion in recent years. I’ll take the lineal title all day.

Status of the title will always be defined by the standing and behaviour of the champion.

That's even more significant with 'lineal'. There are no mandatories and many believe no conditions where a champion can be stripped.

If fighters felt obligated to take on their challengers then I'd be inclined to agree that lineal trumps alphabets given it doesn't have their nonsense to deal with.

But you get the situation where Fury has apparently been the lineal champion through a drugs ban, obesity, inactivity, fights against the likes of Pianeta, Seferi, Schwarz, and a fight against a non-boxer.

'Lineal' can't be with much if that's what the champion can do.

Even the worst alphabet org has higher expectations of their champion than that.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

It's not a title though, it's at best a distinction. What are the set criteria for establishing new lineage?

The alternative is not corrupt sanctioning bodies but an independent, impartial rankings committee like the TBRB.

It’s admittedly a minefield. Especially when the lineal champion retires or takes an extended break. Establishing a new lineage can be difficult but I do think Fury-Wilder 2 unquestionably did that. They were 1 and 2 with Ring, TBRB and ESPN.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Status of the title will always be defined by the standing and behaviour of the champion.

That's even more significant with 'lineal'. There are no mandatories and many believe no conditions where a champion can be stripped.

If fighters felt obligated to take on their challengers then I'd be inclined to agree that lineal trumps alphabets given it doesn't have their nonsense to deal with.

But you get the situation where Fury has apparently been the lineal champion through a drugs ban, obesity, inactivity, fights against the likes of Pianeta, Seferi, Schwarz, and a fight against a non-boxer.

'Lineal' can't be with much if that's what the champion can do.

Even the worst alphabet org has higher expectations of their champion than that.

I still think it holds more weight than the ABC belts. There’s not many if any bad lineal champions to the level of Martin, Liakovich etc.

[KillaCamNZ]

Lineal is dead. Just because there are a few people doing CPR on it, doesn't mean it's coming back.

[Toffee]

I still think it holds more weight than the ABC belts. There’s not many if any bad lineal champions to the level of Martin, Liakovich etc.

We were a swing round away from the current lineal champion not even being a boxer. That's about as bad as it can get. Even the WBC weren't prepared to stoop that low, and that's saying something.

I agree there haven't been as many bad lineal champions as there have been bad alphabet champions. But that's really a comment on the number of alphabet champions we have, which no-one would think is a good thing.

At least Martin had to earn his chance with some kind of criteria for him getting that opportunity.

I'm sure you recall that I'm obviously no fan of Fury's behaviour. But I really think he's devalued the status of lineal champion... if he does in fact hold it.

[Toffee]

It’s admittedly a minefield. Especially when the lineal champion retires or takes an extended break. Establishing a new lineage can be difficult but I do think Fury-Wilder 2 unquestionably did that. They were 1 and 2 with Ring, TBRB and ESPN.

In your view, who were the top 2 when Klitschko fought Joshua?

I still think a very borderline decision by TBRB has influenced a lot of people's thinking on that one. To my mind they were 1 and 2 before and they were 1 and 2 after. TBRB agrees... but for a few months they made Klitschko inactive. And we all know why he was inactive - it wasn't by his own doing.