David Haye hatred? Justified?

[Dave Rado]

The lineal champion doesn't matter as much as it used to because of all the belts. I guess Vitali was never a world champ so since he never has been lineal champion

The lineal champion matters more than ever, precisely because of all the belts. The alphabets belts no longer mean anything, so the only title that matters now is the lineal title.

[The Noose]

You also think Vitali is the best heavyweight ever nobody cares about your opinion cos clearly you are a ******.

This is very true.

He is a top twat on this site. Pointless reading or replying to his twatty posts.

[Dave Rado]

Lewis went life and death with Briggs. He was badly hurt several times and almost KTFO by Briggs.

That's a massive exaggeration. He was a little hurt but not badly and he was never even close to being knocked down. And after the first round it was all Lewis.

[cklmaced]

You're a complete moron

Briggs beat Foreman to become the Lineal World Heavyweight Champ

Briggs KO'd Liakhovich to become the WBO Heavyweight Champ (and yes, that's a real world title you moron)

Shannon Briggs: "Vitali Klitschko is the best fighter I've ever fought, he is better than Lennox Lewis and George Foreman"

Lewis went life and death with Briggs. He was badly hurt several times and almost KTFO by Briggs.

Vitali is nearly 40 and is well past his prime. He is OLDER than Briggs. Vitali dominated every second of every round and destroyed Briggs. The fight should have been stopped. Any other ref or corner would've stopped the fight. Rounds 6,7,8,9,10,12 were all 10-8 rounds. It was a massacre. PRIME Vitali would've KO'd Briggs.

Look at the Vitali-Briggs weigh in pic I posted

Briggs was on steroids for the Vitali fight, his head was twice the size it was when he fought Lennox...thus improving his chin/durability.

Well Vitali used steroids kinda ****** point to make don't you think and no most don't consider the WBO a main world title. Unless Ricky Burns is the best at 130.

[Clegg]

The lineal champion doesn't matter as much as it used to because of all the belts. I guess Vitali was never a world champ so since he never has been lineal champion

I think it depends upon the lineal title in question. If the lineal title of a division can be traced back 20 years then it's a meaningful thing to hold. But if it was vacant until the number 1 and number 2 guys in the division fought 6 months ago then I don't think it's all that important.

The title Lewis won from Briggs means something, in my eyes. You can trace it back, Foreman, Moorer, Holyfield, Douglas, Tyson, Spinks, Holmes. That's a nice list to take over from/add your name to.

Of course, it could be argued that a lot of this is nullified by the fact that Briggs' win over Foreman is considered a robbery by most people.

[cklmaced]

The lineal champion matters more than ever, precisely because of all the belts. The alphabets belts no longer mean anything, so the only title that matters now is the lineal title.

Its a matter of opinion I agree it "should" matter more but beacuse of all the belts its easier for the best fighter in a division not to end up being a lineal champion.

[Dave Rado]

I think it depends upon the lineal title in question. If the lineal title of a division can be traced back 20 years then it's a meaningful thing to hold. But if it was vacant until the number 1 and number 2 guys in the division fought 6 months ago then I don't think it's all that important.

That's the opposite of the truth.

If the #1 and #2 fight each other, then it means there is no meaningful dispute about who is the real champion in that division. So it's the only title that matters, especially those circumstances.

In fact it's when it goes back 20 years that you sometimes get weird anomalies. For instance, Erdei was the lineal Light Heavyweight champion for years and his lineal title at that point could be traced back more than 20 years, but no one considered Erdei to be even a top 3 fighter in his division at the time, never mind the #1 fighter. But he never fought anyone ranked in the top 3 in his division, he won the lineal title against a weak champion (Gonzalez), who won it against another weak champion (an old Michalczewski); and unfortunately for divisional clarity, the consensus #1 at the time (Roy Jones) never had any interest in fighting any of those weak lineal champions. That was actually partly The Ring's fault, because they crowned Jones as The Ring champion, against their own policy of basing their title on who the lineal champion was; and if they had been honest about the fact that a then prime Michalczewski was the lineal champion, there would have been far more demand for Jones to fight Michalczewski, and the fight would probably have happened.

Briggs was another anomaly in that he was the world champion but was not the consensus #1 in his division - but he also didn't win the lineal title by beating the consensus #1 or #2 fighter, he won it be beating a very weak champion, whose linearity went back 20 years, in a fight many considered to be a robbery - but that wasn't nearly such a bad anomaly, because Lewis immediately fought and beat Briggs, and Lewis was the consensus #1, so the Briggs anomaly didn't really matter very much.

Same story with Boldomir. He was an anomaly, his linearity went back many years, but it didn't really matter because he immediately lost his lineal title to the consensus #1.

So when the #1 fights the #2 for the lineal title, that's when it matters most because that's when you get the most divisional clarity. When the linearity goes back 20 years, that's when anomalies are most likely to occur, and that's when the lineal champion and the consensus #1 in the division don't always coincide. Nevertheless, even in those situations, there can only be one world champion, by definition - and the world champion is always the lineal champion. Most of the time, the lineal champion is also the consensus #1, but even when that isn't the case, the lineal champion is still the world champion. When there are anomalies (which are rare), boxing fans should demand that the lineal champion and the consensus #1 fight each other. When they do demand that, the money becomes available to make the fight happen. That's what made Spinks (who was the lineal champion) finally fight Tyson (who was the consensus #1) - public demand. The same thing should have happened in the case of Jones and Michalczewski.

[Dave Rado]

Its a matter of opinion I agree it "should" matter more but beacuse of all the belts its easier for the best fighter in a division not to end up being a lineal champion.

That's because most casual fans and most of the media buy into the bullshit alphabet belts and call their title holders world champions. But they are not world champions. By definition, there can only be one world champion in any division at a given time, and that is the lineal champion.

No one should ever call anyone a world champion unless they are the lineal champion. And if boxing fans and the boxing media started to take that attitude, there would be far more financial pressure on the best boxers in each division to fight each other.