boxers win championships in the ring not based off speculation and popularity

[Masters01]

That being lineal champion makes someone the top fighter in the division is simply one opinion among many. BoxRec rankings, for example, don't automatically rank someone #1 for beating the highest ranked fighter in the division or whoever is generally consider lineal champion.

I'm not sure why proponents of lineal champ = #1 think their opinion is some metaphysical certainty. People have challenged this notion for years, and it is especially out of place in today's boxing landscape where politics takes precedence.

Lol no its not. It's steeped in great history, its tradition, its culture. This is how the boxing heritage operates. To be the man, you have to beat the man..

GGG cannot be the man because he beat Geale. Geale (nor any of GGG's past opponents) were the man at any point of time. He is not entitled to the no.1 spot without earning it.

[RetroSpeed05]

Well at least you still know who the best 160 fighter is.

I know you should have to beat the lineal champ but what if the lineal champ never wants to fight you and its quiet easily done in the present state of boxing.

^^^ This, Dibella made no secret when he said they want to take the money route instead of fighting GGG, now we have a JMW taking the Lineal belt hostage.

[LacedUp]

Lol no its not. It's steeped in great history, its tradition, its culture. This is how the boxing heritage operates. To be the man, you have to beat the man..

GGG cannot be the man because he beat Geale. Geale (nor any of GGG's past opponents) were the man at any point of time. He is not entitled to the no.1 spot without earning it.

but being a crippled shot version of the "champ" is? come on man.

He gained lineage because of that fight, nothing else.

[Masters01]

Lineal is cool, but if you trace back the WW Lineal, Floyd won it back when he beat Mosley, Are you telling me Mosley and the Lineal title Floyd won is better than a win over Pac at that time? We both know a Pac on your resume in '10 is better for your legacy.

Good example. I honestly believe that Pacquaio is the best 147lber. Can I just state that via opinion? No, he hasnt earned it. Floyd earned it, and has kept it, and he rightfully sits at the no1 spot at WW, despite the fact that Pacquiao fans like myself think Pac is better and has always been better.

Otherwise what's the point of fighting fighters and actually earning recognition anymore? If it's okay to be the champ via opinion pole, then this sport is going to get less structured than it already is.

[Levity]

Lol no its not. It's steeped in great history, its tradition, its culture. This is how the boxing heritage operates. To be the man, you have to beat the man..

GGG cannot be the man because he beat Geale. Geale (nor any of GGG's past opponents) were the man at any point of time. He is not entitled to the no.1 spot without earning it.

Of course it's opinion. It's simply an idea that many people disagree with, which is evident in many rankings that have GGG above Cotto.

Lineage may be objective, like holding the most titles is, but when you add lineage = number one you're adding a subjective component.

[therealpugilist]

Lineal is cool, but if you trace back the WW Lineal, Floyd won it back when he beat Mosley, Are you telling me Mosley and the Lineal title Floyd won is better than a win over Pac at that time? We both know a Pac on your resume in '10 is better for your legacy.

you just dont get it
After may retired pac fought unranked dlh, cotto lost to margo before pac beat him and clottey lost to cotto before pac beat him. he was not the number one contender...pac wasnt

Before that cotto and marg were one and two
Marg won then mosley beat him its simple....may came back and beat the number one guy and was undefeated former champ

Roach didnt put him in with shane til what....he lost mayweather

[BattlingNelson]

You make good points, and those are points I agree with mostly - just not the Ali instance. Ali gave up his lineage when he retired. It was then divided in two - yet Holmes gained it when he beat an almost 40 year old Ali who hadn't fought for a couple of years. It's the equivalent of saying Wlad will only be the "true champ" when Lennox comes back and get's beaten by him. Although the time of retirement is much longer in the latter case, the principle remains the same.

Nah. Wlad became lineal when he defeated Chagaev as he was the highest ranked possible contender (save for Vitali).

To me, Tyson became undisputed champ when he beat Tucker because Spinks had ducked tucker to fight Cooney I believe, and decided not to enter Don King's round robin of the undisputed championship. So he's not fighting the other top guys, but holds on to lineage regardless. I don't feel that's a true champion.

As I said, lineage is a nice thing to hold on to - but in quite a few cases, like when you duck the number 1 challenger or in the case of GGG/Martinez, another belt holder and don't fight for a long time - and then lose, you give up the right to be called the TRUE champ.

What about Ali refusing to fight no.1 ranked Holmes for years? He then lost to Leon Spinks. When exactly did Ali lose his right to be called the TRUE champ?

[Masters01]

Of course it's opinion. It's simply an idea that many people disagree with, which is evident in many rankings that have GGG above Cotto.

Lineage may be objective, like holding the most titles is, but when you add lineage = number one you're adding a subjective component.

Again, it is not subjective to say that the lineal champ of a division is the no.1 fighter in that division. That is the one and only requisite for being "the man/the champ", based on the heritage, history and traditions of boxing for centuries, NOT just my opinion. We were all born into the heritage and customs of this sport, and it is not up to us to challenge this. Im a firm believer in respecting the culture.

[ggg_kz]

So following the logic of the OP, Canelo has better chances of becoming the true champ at 160 than GGG just because he has more financial leverage to make this happen.

Meanwhile Soliman just said in the news that he is not fighting GGG next in December as he has some other opponent.

[RetroSpeed05]

you just dont get it
After may retired pac fought unranked dlh, cotto lost to margo before pac beat him and clottey lost to cotto before pac beat him. he was not the number one contender...pac wasnt

Before that cotto and marg were one and two
Marg won then mosley beat him its simple....may came back and beat the number one guy and was undefeated former champ

Roach didnt put him in with shane til what....he lost mayweather

Trust me, i get what your saying, but again, does a Mosley win for the Lineal title mean more than beating Pac in that same time for your resume and legacy?