Unified or Lineal?

[SplitSecond]

Lineal nowadays is just some nonsensical, pointless bullsht. You can prove nothing and be considered lineal, example: Canelo.

[mick1303]

Question:

Is it even possible these day to figure out who is the man who beat the man who beat the man?

My thing is if their is no lineal title in a division then how do you become lineal these days without becoming Undisputed first?

These days you hear how this fighter won the Lineal title this many times in this many divisions or that fighter who the lineal title this many times?

Can we all agree that lineal is pretty much a useless title unless that fighter becomes undisputed first to start a new lineage?

What also makes lineal title less meaningful, is that for all their shortcomings ABCs enforce title defences. If you not fight their mandatory challenger in due time (except for unification), they will strip you and assign their best ranked fighters to fight for the vacant title. There is nobody to strip lineal champion if he refuses to fight in this weightclass, goes below or above. For instance if the fighter is inactive for a year, Boxrec removes him from the list of active fighters. If the holder of lineal title could be stripped this way, the title would hold more value. But such authority does not exist. Another source of confusion is whether or not lineal title can change hands at the catchweight fight.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Now that im finally back from my Mod mandated two week break, i just wanted to say hello to yall.

I have a boxing question for everyone:

In your opinion, what is the more important and the bigger deal career wise, being a unified champion or a Lineal Champion. We all know the ultimate is to become Undisputed in a division but we know that is not likely to happen in this era. But what is yall opinion on what is more important and the better accomplishment, being Unified or Lineal?

That's the sad part.

[SensFullViolenc]

Tyson had every title and was not lineal until he beat Spinks

Roy Jones had all the titles at 175 but was never lineal

This part especially should show you that lineal doesnt mean squat.

Its the quality of the fighter (as measured by his performances, not belts or titles) that you beat. That's what makes a TRUE CHAMPION.

All the belts & titles & lineage are for people who dont know who the good fighters are. They dont mean squat.

[boxinghead530]

Tyson had every title and was not lineal until he beat Spinks

Roy Jones had all the titles at 175 but was never lineal

Dude Tyson Spinks was the end of the golden era. Spinks was consider lineal because he beat Larry Holmes who had beaten the man that beat the man. He was ibf champ until they stripped him and Tyson capture his vacated title to win all titles. Then once he beat Spinks he won that lineal title.

Those were difterent times but in these ***ed up times where most all lineages are broken in boxing how do you become lineal without becoming undisputed.

If the lineage is broken then ******ed ass Isaac Clarke says the fans determine lineal as they crown who is #1 and #2 regardless if either one has a title or not and when they fight they start a new lineage. Not one person in this thread backed him up on that ridiculous claim.

Roy jones didn't hold all title at 175. Forget about that dude Darius? He held a title and the lineal title.

[Rockybigblower]

What also makes lineal title less meaningful, is that for all their shortcomings ABCs enforce title defences. If you not fight their mandatory challenger in due time (except for unification), they will strip you and assign their best ranked fighters to fight for the vacant title. There is nobody to strip lineal champion if he refuses to fight in this weightclass, goes below or above. For instance if the fighter is inactive for a year, Boxrec removes him from the list of active fighters. If the holder of lineal title could be stripped this way, the title would hold more value. But such authority does not exist. Another source of confusion is whether or not lineal title can change hands at the catchweight fight.

When was the last time any of this happened?...i cant recall in recent times anybody being strip for not facing a certain opponent despite a number of threats to do so...and i cant recall the last time a vacant title was fought for by the 2 top ranked contenders. Generally speaking its a money guy vs someone down around 8 so that the belt can land in the hands of a cashed up promoter...thus providing bigger money routs that increase sanctioning fees for the governing bodies.

[Larry the boss]

Dude Tyson Spinks was the end of the golden era. Spinks was consider lineal because he beat Larry Holmes who had beaten the man that beat the man. He was ibf champ until they stripped him and Tyson capture his vacated title to win all titles. Then once he beat Spinks he won that lineal title.

Those were difterent times but in these ***ed up times where most all lineages are broken in boxing how do you become lineal without becoming undisputed.

If the lineage is broken then ******ed ass Isaac Clarke says the fans determine lineal as they crown who is #1 and #2 regardless if either one has a title or not and when they fight they start a new lineage. Not one person in this thread backed him up on that ridiculous claim.

Roy jones didn't hold all title at 175. Forget about that dude Darius? He held a title and the lineal title.

Yes he did he had wba,wba,ibf..WBO was not recognized then

[boxinghead530]

Yes he did he had wba,wba,ibf..WBO was not recognized then

Bro wbo was recognized then that was late 90's.

WBO started I think early to mid 80's and wasn't considered as a real legit world title but by the mid 90's it achieved legit status.

[Larry the boss]

Bro wbo was recognized then that was late 90's.

WBO started I think early to mid 80's and wasn't considered as a real legit world title but by the mid 90's it achieved legit status.

i disagree..it did not really get recognized until the 2000's man...no one cared about the WBO in the 90's


The World Boxing Organization (WBO), established in Puerto Rico in 1988, took longer to acquire credibility. By 2001, the WBA was giving the same recognition to WBO champions as to WBA, WBC and IBF champions.[10] In 2004, the WBC began naming WBO champions on its ranking listings.[11] The IBF did not recognise the WBO in May 2006,[12] but was doing so by February 2007.[13] Conversely, the WBO explicitly recognises the other three sanctioning bodies.[14]

[Larry the boss]

Roy Jones Jr. was spuriously promoted as the undisputed light heavyweight champion by HBO after unifying the WBA, WBC and IBF titles in June 1999, for which he was also awarded The Ring championship title in 2002. However, two of those belts (WBA and IBF) had been stripped from Dariusz Michalczewski, who had unified them with his WBO title by beating the Lineal champion Virgil Hill in June 1997, and subsequently remained unbeaten, defending his remaining belt until 2004.[22] Speaking of Jones' claim to being undisputed champion, one writer opined that the distinction "could just as easily belong to current WBO titlist Dariusz Michalczewski."[23]