Multi-weight champs vs. Undisputed champs?

Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Boxfan83
    The Coach
    Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
    • Feb 2015
    • 15809
    • 2,066
    • 719
    • 160,371

    #41
    Originally posted by Chrismart
    As others have said, it depends on the opposition.
    To pick one though, i'd go with undisputed as it's the route i'm always hoping a champion will chase and one i hope they pull off. I don't know..i'm just a sucker for it.
    I cant stand that boxing has so many damn titles but I will admit nothing looks cooler than a guy walking to the ring holding all 4 belts.

    Comment

    • Larry the boss
      EDUCATED
      Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
      • Jan 2011
      • 90798
      • 6,419
      • 4,473
      • 2,500,480

      #42
      Originally posted by b0x
      Depends who is available in what weight class. For example Broner being a 3 weight world champion is not good when he just fought weak or shot champs. If he had to unify one division he would have been screwed. At any one.
      Maidana was a weak champ?

      Comment

      • boxinghead530
        Banned
        Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
        • May 2015
        • 3491
        • 147
        • 82
        • 5,299

        #43
        Originally posted by therealpugilist
        I cant consider a fighter who didnt fight for his belts as being "undisputed" when he didnt even fight for it. He would be considered a unified titleholder. Cant be undisputed if you didnt take care of the other top 3 guys.

        It takes a lot of the gloss and meaning away.....Hopkins fought DLH, Trinidad, Holmes for the belts he didnt have and thats why it reflects on his legacy....he fought for his titles against good opposition

        fighters dont get credit for fights that never happened.

        Back in the day and even recently, you at least have to fight for the vacant titles. this guy has more board room titles than ones he won in the ring.


        Maybe one day he'll fight the other top guys at 160, but it doesnt feel right patting him on the back for doing something Hopkins and others had to actually fight for.
        Well fanboy if you read I wrote earlier I said GGG is just a unfied champ and not undisputed.

        Larry said he's one belt away from holding all of the belts. And if GGG does get all the belts and there is no other champ to dispute him as champion then GGG is the undisputed champ. It's not GGG fault his path to the title was easier than others of past generation. As much as you hate him and as bad as his competition was he got there the way he got there and there is no dis*****g that.

        I think GGG path to being undisputed is easier than others but it is what it is. If you are going to blame anything blame l the era, because other champs ducked and gave up belts rather than fight him. And to me that says something about GGG even though it may not to you.

        But in this era of boxing which this thread is about, being undisputed means more because really how many undisputed champs do we have now? Zero I'm guessing and how many multi weight champs are there? To many to count.

        Comment

        • Sugar Adam Ali
          Undisputed Champion
          Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
          • Apr 2013
          • 27630
          • 970
          • 1,174
          • 82,827

          #44
          Broner is a 4 division champ.... Nuff said


          Undisputed was wlad or Ward


          Undisputed is much harder in today's boxing

          Comment

          • Real King Kong
            Undisputed Champion
            Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
            • May 2010
            • 12017
            • 454
            • 24
            • 105,905

            #45
            Originally posted by larryxxx...
            Who did you fight to get the title belts? RESUME!!!!
            Exactly...broner is a good example of a multi division title holder who didn't fight the best opposition in any of the divisions. He either fought for vacant titles or fought the weaker belt holders.

            Comment

            • Real King Kong
              Undisputed Champion
              Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
              • May 2010
              • 12017
              • 454
              • 24
              • 105,905

              #46
              Originally posted by larryxxx...
              Maidana was a weak champ?
              Did broner win a belt in that fight?

              Comment

              • bojangles1987
                bo jungle
                Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                • Jul 2009
                • 41118
                • 1,326
                • 357
                • 63,028

                #47
                Originally posted by larryxxx...
                Maidana was a weak champ?
                Maidana wasn't a champ. And Broner was expected to stomp him.

                Comment

                • Sugar Adam Ali
                  Undisputed Champion
                  Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                  • Apr 2013
                  • 27630
                  • 970
                  • 1,174
                  • 82,827

                  #48
                  Originally posted by b0x
                  No, I said champ in 3 weight classes. He lost to Maidana. The 3 he beat to get the belts were weak champs. Hence why he lost when he stepped up. And then just for good measure he tried again vs Porter at catchweight and got schooled again.
                  Broner is a 4 division champ-- 130, 135 and then 147 vs pauli, then fought Maidana, and recently won at 140 for his 4th division

                  Comment

                  • Robbie Barrett
                    Banned
                    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                    • Nov 2013
                    • 40891
                    • 2,779
                    • 667
                    • 570,921

                    #49
                    People mentioning Golovkin answer this. How can someone be undisputed if they aren't lineal? If they aren't lineal they've never fought the #1 or #2 guy in the division. I'd call that disputed.

                    Comment

                    • monkeyboy
                      Quack Quack *****!
                      Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
                      • Sep 2005
                      • 1198
                      • 86
                      • 287
                      • 14,153

                      #50
                      Originally posted by Paulie Walnuts
                      People mentioning Golovkin answer this. How can someone be undisputed if they aren't lineal? If they aren't lineal they've never fought the #1 or #2 guy in the division. I'd call that disputed.
                      The other thing to consider is that as an undisputed champion no one else can get a title at the weight except through you. Multi weight champs don't create that kind of road block.

                      I would always give more value to an undisputed or multi-title one weight champion. Over time they become an unavoidable target.

                      GGG may not have had a tough battle to become middleweight kingpin but no one can claim to be king at the weight but him. Not many other weights have a singular, stand out dominant champion.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP