Unified or Lineal?

[daggum]

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

are you saying calzaghe wasn't a legit champion?

[daggum]

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]

ok so you challenged your own argument successfully. larry wins. and larry loses.

[Larry the boss]

are you saying calzaghe wasn't a legit champion?

lol................

[Larry the boss]

ok so you challenged your own argument successfully. larry wins. and larry loses.

no my argument was that he was undisputed

[daggum]

no my argument was that he was undisputed

but then you posted something saying he was spuriously promoted as undisputed which means not authentic or counterfeit

[Larry the boss]

but then you posted something saying he was spuriously promoted as undisputed which means not authentic or counterfeit

That was because he was given titles that were stripped from another fighter..has 0 to do with the WBO

[Nay_Sayer]

Lineal.....

[boxinghead530]

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]

Bro, Oscar de la Hoya by late 94 was considered a two time world champion and both those title were WBO.

For a lot of years yes the WBO was considered second class but by the mid 90's it finally achieved legit status.

[boxinghead530]

We are straying off topic.

The question was in this era meaning last 10-15 years and now. What is the more important being lineal or being unified?

For me I think a unified champ is way more important because in my eyes being lineal pretty much died off. Of course we have a couple exception like Hopkins and Cory Spinks. But for the most part lineal is pretty much extinct until a division is truly unified there is an undisputed champion, which will then in turn start the new lineage.

[original zero]

For a lot of years yes the WBO was considered second class but by the mid 90's it finally achieved legit status.

You're insane. Nobody considered it legit in the mid 90s except UK fans who were willing to pretend their fighters were real world champions when they weren't.

Holyfield and Lewis fought for the undisputed heavyweight championship of the world in 1999 and the WBO was nowhere in sight. The idea that it was legit even 5 years before that, when it was barely legit 5 years AFTER that, is completely laughable.

Even in 2004, the WBO heavyweight title was so lightly regarded that Corrie Sanders vacated so he could fight for the vacant WBC title instead.

To this day, the WBO title is still a clear second class citizen, but as of 2007, is technically recognized by the other organizations.

But mid 90s?!? Hahahahaa you're a ******.