Unified or Lineal?

[Jsmooth9876]

You can only become lineal by beating the champ or the guy viewed as the best in the division.

The orgs decide who they want as title holders. They strip guys or give titles to get who they want as a title holder.


Pretty clear which means more.

Yeah... Stevensons lineal title at LHW means so much more than the titles Ward just won off Kovalev.. not so clear to me.

[Robbie Barrett]

Yeah... Stevensons lineal title at LHW means so much more than the titles Ward just won off Kovalev.. not so clear to me.

Do the titles mean more or the win? If there was no titles would the win mean any less?

[Jsmooth9876]

Do the titles mean more or the win? If there was no titles would the win mean any less?

It wouldn't mean any less to me. At the same time would Stevenson beating Dawson mean any more or less? The more impressive win to me is Ward and he and Kovalev are recognized as the 2 best LHW in the world with Stevenson 3rd. So IMO that lineal title don't mean ****. Just a guy hoarding an imaginary title along with the real one he holds

[Robbie Barrett]

It wouldn't mean any less to me. At the same time would Stevenson beating Dawson mean any more or less? The more impressive win to me is Ward and he and Kovalev are recognized as the 2 best LHW in the world with Stevenson 3rd. So IMO that lineal title don't mean ****. Just a guy hoarding an imaginary title along with the real one he holds

So it's the win not the titles. That wasn't the question the thread starter asked. He said which is the bigger deal between lineal and unified. If you had to choose which honour you'd rather have 2 org titles or recognised as lineal which would you choose?

[Jsmooth9876]

So it's the win not the titles. That wasn't the question the thread starter asked. He said which is the bigger deal between lineal and unified. If you had to choose which honour you'd rather have 2 org titles or recognised as lineal which would you choose?

Personally it would depend on who I beat. would beating a washed Sergio Martinez mean more to me than beating let's say Golovkin and Lemuiex at MW for 2 titles? Of course not.

i think if it was so easy to unify a division we'd see it happen more than once or twice a decade. Beating one guy makes you lineal, no matter how washed up or whatever he is. I think unifying ALL the titles holds more weight than one win. Unless you're beating Mayweather or PAC or someone that good of course then that trumps anyone else you could beat for the other titles obviously

[Robbie Barrett]

Personally it would depend on who I beat. would beating a washed Sergio Martinez mean more to me than beating let's say Golovkin and Lemuiex at MW for 2 titles? Of course not.

i think if it was so easy to unify a division we'd see it happen more than once or twice a decade. Beating one guy makes you lineal, no matter how washed up or whatever he is. I think unifying ALL the titles holds more weight than one win. Unless you're beating Mayweather or PAC or someone that good of course then that trumps anyone else you could beat for the other titles obviously

Once or twice a decade? Unifying happens all the time, it means having more than 1 org title, undisputed is them all.

Forget who you beat that wasn't the question. If you had the choice of having your name in the history books as the IBF/WBC title holder or the lineal champ which would you choose?

[SensFullViolenc]

Do the titles mean more or the win? If there was no titles would the win mean any less?

nope the titles dont mean anything, its the win over an excellent fighter that matters

but that goes for lineal too. A dude could be lineal, but he aint $h!t. Its only if the lineal champ is good, that the win matters.

So unified, lineal, titles, abc, blah, blah, blah. That **** is just for recordkeeping purposes.

You beat excellent fighters, thats what matters.


NOTE: i still think that Kova won, but thats not relevant to this discussion

[Real King Kong]

So it's the win not the titles. That wasn't the question the thread starter asked. He said which is the bigger deal between lineal and unified. If you had to choose which honour you'd rather have 2 org titles or recognised as lineal which would you choose?

There's no blanket answer to that question...it depends on the situation. In the case of ward and stevenson, I'd take ward's belts over stevenson's "lineal title" all day long. Ward fought the top threat in the division...what has stevenson been doing with his precious lineal title that he's had for almost 4 years? History is riddled with situations where the lineal title holder is not fighting the best, and sometimes not even fighting anyone in the division. Under certain circumstances, it's just as much of a joke as the alphabet belts that you abhor. But you don't wanna talk about those situations cuz ggg isn't lineal champ.

[Jsmooth9876]

Once or twice a decade? Unifying happens all the time, it means having more than 1 org title, undisputed is them all.

Forget who you beat that wasn't the question. If you had the choice of having your name in the history books as the IBF/WBC title holder or the lineal champ which would you choose?

I misunderstood then, I thought you meant undisputed. Either way it still would depend on who you beat. Would you rather beat a hall of farmer like Ward or beat Stevenson and be able to call yourself the lineal champ? Sometimes the lineal champ is not the best fighter in the division and beating someone else trumps beating him. Beating Carlos Baldomir to become lineal at 147 is not in the top 10 things Floyd did in his career

[Best in Boxing]

Yes it's all about context. Let's take Canelo and his fake lineal championship at 160 (SMDH). He beat Cotto at Caneloweight, who beat Sergio Martinez (With bad knees) who was the man when he had 2 good knees and only was the man cause he avoided THE GOAT GGG. See how lineal doesn't mean fighting the best in the division?

since when does beating:
147 Brook, Wade, Lemieux, Monroe, Murray, Rubio, Geale, Stevens, Macklin, Ishida,& Rosado make you the GOAT????