Why Does No One Talk About The Lineal HW Title Anymore?

[TheOneAboveAll]

I suppose that Boxing chatter and Boxing history are adjacent topics.
If you peruse a message board such as this one, you can see the teens - 20's - 30s generations displaying the ADD / ADHD for which they are famous, have little time for verified knowledge. History is the proper recording of what is known to have happened. It's study and acknowledgment is a great deal more 'Academic' a pursuit than merely hashing out recent fight results and projecting fiercely held (and occasionally cogent) opionions.

To anyone who is into boxing deep enough; the sport's 3,374 year history as a fomal sport, with its basic form nearly unchanged through today, is one of the most meticulously recorded social conventions of the human species, and is a fascinating field of study.
For those who are content to simply dip their toe in the water, the news clippings and fanatical banter is enough context for watching the fights.

To be clear, however; the linial Heavyweight Boxing Championship is the oldest, richest, most meaningful and intercultural title in all arenas of entertainment. It segues neatly from the earliest civilizations to the modern age, and is found to be acknowledged everywhere.

The current crop of "World title sanctioning bodies" are part of a for-profit enterprise that would sooner have casual fans forget all of that, and hoodwink young fans into thinking that it is THEY who get to decide who the Heavyweight Champion is.
But History provides the antidote to that skillful misdirection, for those willing to engage in learning, because title lineage is uncorrupted, and there for the knowing.

There will be those, of course; who might claim that this "History doesn't matter", or that they themselves (somehow) "know better".
In them, regardless of the quality or frequency of their posting here, we are reminded that intellectual lightweights and casual observers might love the purity of Boxing too.


Forvanta- Phorbas- Aries- Herakles- Tydeus- Polydeusus- Theseus- Onomastos- Diappos- Komaios- Pythagoras- Tisandros- Praxidamas- Glaucos- Philon- Ikkos- Diognetos- Euthymos- Theagenes- Euthymos- Menalkes- Diagoras- Akousilous- Alkainetos- Kleomachos- Eukles- Demarchos- Phormion- Damoxenidas- Labax- Aristion- Philammon- Asamon- Mys- Satyros- Satyros- Archippos- Kallippos- Kleitomachus- Epitherses- Xenothemius- Agesarchos- Atyanas- Thaliarchos- Nikophon- Demokrates- Melankomas- Herakliedes- Marcus Tullius- Photion- Buck- Stokes- Flanders- Clarkson- Sutton- Figg- Pipes- Taylor- Broughton- Slack- Stevens- Meggs- Millsom- Jachau- Darts- Lyons- Darts- Corcoran- Sellers- Ferns- Johnson- Brian- Mendoza- Jackson- Owen- Bartholomew- Belcher- Pearce- Gully- Cribb- Spring- Cannon- Ward- Crawley- Ward- Burke- Thompson- Caunt- Ward- Caunt- Thompson- Perry- Broome- Paddock- Sayers- Hurst- Mace- King- Wormald- Mace- Coburn- Mace- Allen- Goss- Ryan- Sullivan- Corbett- Fitzsimmons- Jeffries- Hart- Burns- Johnson- Willard- Dempsey- Tunney- Schmelling- Sharkey- Carnera- Bear- Braddock- Louis- Charles- Walcott- Marciano- Patterson- Johansson- Patterson- Liston- Ali- Frazier- Foreman- Ali- L. Spinks- Ali- Holmes- M. Spinks- Tyson- Douglas- Holyfield- Bowe- Holyfield- Moorer- Foreman- Briggs- Lewis- Rachman- Lewis- W. Klitschko- Fury- Usyk.


That what's REAL.

That's not REAL at all. You forgot Cain.

[Willow The Wisp]

Honestly, I considered Fury's lineal claim invalid after his first retirement. It wasn't until he knocked out Wilder for the TBRB Championship, Ring belt, and WBC belt that I considered him champion again. But then he "retired" again and Usyk beat Joshua for the TBRB and Ring Championships, so as far as I'm concerned Usyk has already been the real lineal champion since that point.

When Joe Louis retired for 1.5 years, his lineal claim was ended and he had to fight Ezzard Charles for the vacant lineal championship upon his return. Charles won the fight to become champion, but that's not the point. The point is if Joe Louis wasn't allowed to keep his lineal championship through a retirement, neither should Fury.

No. Charles won linial from Louis.

[Willow The Wisp]

That's not REAL at all. You forgot Cain.

Humor, right?

[famicommander]

No. Charles won linial from Louis.

No, Louis retired and challenged for the vacant championship.

[Skip Bayless]

A new lineage has just been established, neither wlad or fury were ever lineal. If the man who beat the man has retired, a new lineage can only be established by becoming undisputed hence why Wlad was never the lineal champ therefore fury wasn’t either.

Usyk has achieved everything and should retire as the lineal undisputed champ.

[JakeTheBoxer]

Usyk is N.1., that is all that matters.

[Toffee]

Usyk is N.1., that is all that matters.

I don't deny the "lineal champion" stuff. I just think it's not something you can make a claim to. It gets dealt with historically.

Right now there can be zero doubt that Usyk is THE man.

Wlad was the last man to do it. Fury then beat him. But from the point of Fury's exit from the sport and return years later against the Pianeta's and Seferi's, there have been multiple viable claims. It doesn't really matter whether people agree or disagree with them, there was doubt. It was Fury's career that created that.

Now all roads lead to Usyk. And, finally, we have someone worthy of lineal status.

[sensfulviolence]

Lineal has been broken so many times by retirements etc that's it's largely symbolic. Some people place a lot of value on it. I don't. Says everything that Naoya Inoue only has 2 lineal championships despite beating the consensus top guys in 4 divisions. Junior fly was vacant since 2011, so there wasn't anyone to beat, and Nietes and Ioka were ranked above Hernandez by Ring, so I can forgive that one, but Narvaez was #1 at junior bantam, and that lineal title had been vacant since the retirement of Masamori Tokuyama in 2006. The only reason it wasn't given to Inoue was that he wasn't highly ranked enough at the time to count, because he goes straight for the best available fighters. And he then racked up 7 straight defenses and spent the next 4 years ranked #1, but apparently that's not enough to be considered lineal. .

Same deal with Bam v Sunny not being considered for lineal or Ring because they didn't want to value Bam's achievements at 115 for his rank at 112. But does ANYONE think Bam isn't the man at 112?

It's arbitrary and fundamentally meaningless IMO. Just a marketing trinket made up by boxing media.

I wouldn't go so far to say that its a marketing ploy. It is an objective measure designed to tell you how "beat the man" back to the one belt era.

However, I agree with you that in many circumstances, it just doesn't make much sense. And we dont need it to say who is the real CHAMP in a division. Like your example, when lineal didnt consider Monster the champ... I have eyes and a brain, he was the champ, no matter what lineal says

But If you look at the current lineal champs (from the transnational boxing etc. etc.), they all seem valid to me, currently

[real raw]

I suppose that Boxing chatter and Boxing history are adjacent topics.
If you peruse a message board such as this one, you can see the teens - 20's - 30s generations displaying the ADD / ADHD for which they are famous, have little time for verified knowledge. History is the proper recording of what is known to have happened. It's study and acknowledgment is a great deal more 'Academic' a pursuit than merely hashing out recent fight results and projecting fiercely held (and occasionally cogent) opionions.

To anyone who is into boxing deep enough; the sport's 3,374 year history as a fomal sport, with its basic form nearly unchanged through today, is one of the most meticulously recorded social conventions of the human species, and is a fascinating field of study.
For those who are content to simply dip their toe in the water, the news clippings and fanatical banter is enough context for watching the fights.

To be clear, however; the linial Heavyweight Boxing Championship is the oldest, richest, most meaningful and intercultural title in all arenas of entertainment. It segues neatly from the earliest civilizations to the modern age, and is found to be acknowledged everywhere.

The current crop of "World title sanctioning bodies" are part of a for-profit enterprise that would sooner have casual fans forget all of that, and hoodwink young fans into thinking that it is THEY who get to decide who the Heavyweight Champion is.
But History provides the antidote to that skillful misdirection, for those willing to engage in learning, because title lineage is uncorrupted, and there for the knowing.

There will be those, of course; who might claim that this "History doesn't matter", or that they themselves (somehow) "know better".
In them, regardless of the quality or frequency of their posting here, we are reminded that intellectual lightweights and casual observers might love the purity of Boxing too.


Forvanta- Phorbas- Aries- Herakles- Tydeus- Polydeusus- Theseus- Onomastos- Diappos- Komaios- Pythagoras- Tisandros- Praxidamas- Glaucos- Philon- Ikkos- Diognetos- Euthymos- Theagenes- Euthymos- Menalkes- Diagoras- Akousilous- Alkainetos- Kleomachos- Eukles- Demarchos- Phormion- Damoxenidas- Labax- Aristion- Philammon- Asamon- Mys- Satyros- Satyros- Archippos- Kallippos- Kleitomachus- Epitherses- Xenothemius- Agesarchos- Atyanas- Thaliarchos- Nikophon- Demokrates- Melankomas- Herakliedes- Marcus Tullius- Photion- Buck- Stokes- Flanders- Clarkson- Sutton- Figg- Pipes- Taylor- Broughton- Slack- Stevens- Meggs- Millsom- Jachau- Darts- Lyons- Darts- Corcoran- Sellers- Ferns- Johnson- Brian- Mendoza- Jackson- Owen- Bartholomew- Belcher- Pearce- Gully- Cribb- Spring- Cannon- Ward- Crawley- Ward- Burke- Thompson- Caunt- Ward- Caunt- Thompson- Perry- Broome- Paddock- Sayers- Hurst- Mace- King- Wormald- Mace- Coburn- Mace- Allen- Goss- Ryan- Sullivan- Corbett- Fitzsimmons- Jeffries- Hart- Burns- Johnson- Willard- Dempsey- Tunney- Schmelling- Sharkey- Carnera- Bear- Braddock- Louis- Charles- Walcott- Marciano- Patterson- Johansson- Patterson- Liston- Ali- Frazier- Foreman- Ali- L. Spinks- Ali- Holmes- M. Spinks- Tyson- Douglas- Holyfield- Bowe- Holyfield- Moorer- Foreman- Briggs- Lewis- Rachman- Lewis- W. Klitschko- Fury- Usyk.


That what's REAL.

THAT is the most fiction i've ever read. If you believe Forvanta was the best fighter in the entire world, you're delusional. Village champion at best . I know for a fact that he ducked Lionitus.

[Toffee]

I wouldn't go so far to say that its a marketing ploy. It is an objective measure designed to tell you how "beat the man" back to the one belt era.

However, I agree with you that in many circumstances, it just doesn't make much sense. And we dont need it to say who is the real CHAMP in a division. Like your example, when lineal didnt consider Monster the champ... I have eyes and a brain, he was the champ, no matter what lineal says

But If you look at the current lineal champs (from the transnational boxing etc. etc.), they all seem valid to me, currently

Currently, but most would have disagreed with TBRB's view of it being Usyk prior to the weekend. FWIW, TBRB go to great pains to point out that their title isn't trying to be the lineal title. They all look good now because one man took it all beyond doubt.

The thing is, "Lineal" isn't objective a lot of the time. It certainly wasn't through Fury's, in theory, long reign.

Then you consider that if the Lineal title can be retained through drugs bans and retirements and then defended against Pianeta, Seferi, Schwarz, Wallin, Chisora, and a non boxer... then why are we even talking about it?

The fighter always makes the title. Usyk is worthy because he's proven himself the man.