Comments Thread For: Gervonta Davis Now Sole Recognized WBA Lightweight Titlist; Haney Removed As 'Super' Champ

[famicommander]

That's not accurate. Davis was the IBF champ and had the WBA (super) belt at 130.

-edit- nevermind. Read more closely and you're defining it by media belts, not sanctioning organizations. Seems arbitrary, but by that standard, yes, you were accurate.

The lineal title is the real championship. It's not me being arbitrary, it's the way boxing has always been. It's highlander rules, there can be only one champion in any given division at any given point in time.

Davis has never even faced a fighter ranked in the top 5 of the division he fought them in, let alone beat a reigning lineal champion or won a fight between the consensus top 2 guys.

[crimsonfalcon07]

The lineal title is the real championship. It's not me being arbitrary, it's the way boxing has always been. It's highlander rules, there can be only one champion in any given division at any given point in time.

Davis has never even faced a fighter ranked in the top 5 of the division he fought them in, let alone beat a reigning lineal champion or won a fight between the consensus top 2 guys.

Don't be disingenuous. We both know that it's far more common to call a guy a divisional champion based on winning primary alphabet titles in a division than anything else. Not at all the way boxing has always been. Ring belt didn't even exist for a huge portion of time. Lineal turned into a mess when guys retired or vacated without being beaten. It's an artificial distinction, and there's no way around that.

[famicommander]

Don't be disingenuous. We both know that it's far more common to call a guy a divisional champion based on winning primary alphabet titles in a division than anything else. Not at all the way boxing has always been. Ring belt didn't even exist for a huge portion of time. Lineal turned into a mess when guys retired or vacated without being beaten. It's an artificial distinction, and there's no way around that.

The belts are all a joke and you know it. They don't rank fighters from best to worst, they have a list of fighters that have satisfied whatever hoops the sanctioning body happened to put in front of them to that point in time. If you're an unranked fighter fighting another unranked fighter for a vacant belt, neither of you gets to call yourself a champion after the fight. End of discussion.

[Teetotaler69]

What a joke lmao froid and his bltch are clowns

[Oregonian]

What a joke lmao froid and his bltch are clowns

————-
The hate here is insane

[MrShakeAndBake]

Vergonta is a hoe chanpion

[crimsonfalcon07]

The belts are all a joke and you know it. They don't rank fighters from best to worst, they have a list of fighters that have satisfied whatever hoops the sanctioning body happened to put in front of them to that point in time. If you're an unranked fighter fighting another unranked fighter for a vacant belt, neither of you gets to call yourself a champion after the fight. End of discussion.

I happen to agree with you on that, but that's not what the term has always meant, and I'm sure you know that. Common usage and all that. I'm on record saying that secondary belts are BS, but the belts have meant champion well before the creation of Ring belts etc, at least the real ones, and not the jumped up mandatory secondary belt crap. Your distinction, much as you and I might agree on it, isn't what "champion" means to the vast majority of the boxing world.

[dan-b]

The belts are all a joke and you know it. They don't rank fighters from best to worst, they have a list of fighters that have satisfied whatever hoops the sanctioning body happened to put in front of them to that point in time. If you're an unranked fighter fighting another unranked fighter for a vacant belt, neither of you gets to call yourself a champion after the fight. End of discussion.

I happen to agree with you on that, but that's not what the term has always meant, and I'm sure you know that. Common usage and all that. I'm on record saying that secondary belts are BS, but the belts have meant champion well before the creation of Ring belts etc, at least the real ones, and not the jumped up mandatory secondary belt crap. Your distinction, much as you and I might agree on it, isn't what "champion" means to the vast majority of the boxing world.

One should make a distinction between champions and titleholders where possible. Making absolute distinctions on the matter is difficult but someone winning a vacant WBO belt is probably the lowest threshold to pass and that person should be recognised as a titleholder, not a champion.

If you watch the HBO broadcast of Hopkins - Trinidad, their graphics displayed Hopkins as middleweight 'champion' and Trinidad as middleweight 'titleholder'. I think this was correct because Hopkins had the pedigree, length of reign and two of the alphabet titles at that point. Trinidad had just one fight in the division, his KO of Joppy.

[Bronx2245]

Would love to see Issac Cruz vs. William Zepeda, in a WBA Final Eliminator! Tank vs. Shakur needs to happen ASAP!

[Toscano]

Boxing being boxing