Unified or Lineal?

[Robbie Barrett]

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.

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

You're skating around the answer. We all know you won't admit it's lineal.

The thread starter asked which was the bigger deal unified or lineal not who you beat to achieve it.

[Real King Kong]

You're skating around the answer. We all know you won't admit it's lineal.

The thread starter asked which was the bigger deal unified or lineal not who you beat to achieve it.

I just answered it...there is no clear answer, it's defined by circumstances. I just gave you an example where being a unified champion is more meaningful than being the lineal champion.

[SensFullViolenc]

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?

Is the Ali-Frazier trilogy significant bc of the lineal or abc titles?

Maybe, but I would say its significant bc they were two badasses.

Wlad was lineal champ and had many lineal defenses, more than Ali or Holmes. Does that make him greater? Of course not, he beat up a bunch of mediocre fighters.

ALL titles, belts, etc. (abc, lineal, Ring) are just a recordkeeping device. Sometimes the TRUE BADASS holds the title, sometimes he doesnt.

I know enough about boxing to know who the true BADASSES are in each division, and I dont need to refer to titles or belts -- most any hardcore boxing fan can do so.

Its who you beat, not what title you have.

[Jsmooth9876]

You're skating around the answer. We all know you won't admit it's lineal.

The thread starter asked which was the bigger deal unified or lineal not who you beat to achieve it.

Smh. Do you have to think you're right about everything you talk about? Everyone has an opinion, doesn't have to match yours to make it wrong or right. I don't even know who the fking lineal champ is in half the divisions in boxing but I could tell you 99% of the champs from 122- HW. Same way Canelo is somehow lineal and ring champ at 160 having never fought there since the CW with Cotto Doesn't mean **** in the long run. Jacobs and GGG should be fighting for both on Saturday night honestly

[SensFullViolenc]

Beating Carlos Baldomir to become lineal at 147 is not in the top 10 things Floyd did in his career

This right here is another prime example. When lineage is weak it doesnt mean squat.

If you unify by beating a bunch of paper titles it doesnt mean squat.

So the answer to the original question "Which is better, lineal or unifying" is "it depends on who you beat"

[SensFullViolenc]

You're skating around the answer. We all know you won't admit it's lineal.

The thread starter asked which was the bigger deal unified or lineal not who you beat to achieve it.

I agree with the dude who says "it depends"

But if you really want to force a binary answer here, based on current circumstances I'd say unified is superior to lineal

Look where there are both lineal & unified in a division, and who is actually better:

LHW: Stevenson is lineal, Ward is (partially) unified. Ward (and Kova) >>>> Stevenson (and the P4P lists agree)

MW: Canelo is lineal, GGG is unified. GGG >
>> Canelo (P4P lists agree)

So currently, unified champs are superior to lineal champs.



NOTE: I dont consider Canelo to be lineal, he's vacated

[SensFullViolenc]

I would have loved to have seen these boards back when Mayorga and Baldomir was lineal. Isaac Clarke must have been praising these dudes up and down, seeing as they were the lineal champs.

[Mequetrefe]

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

[Robbie Barrett]

I agree with the dude who says "it depends"

But if you really want to force a binary answer here, based on current circumstances I'd say unified is superior to lineal

Look where there are both lineal & unified in a division, and who is actually better:

LHW: Stevenson is lineal, Ward is (partially) unified. Ward (and Kova) >>>> Stevenson (and the P4P lists agree)

MW: Canelo is lineal, GGG is unified. GGG >
>> Canelo (P4P lists agree)

So currently, unified champs are superior to lineal champs.



NOTE: I dont consider Canelo to be lineal, he's vacated

Pacquiao lineal, Thurman unified. Pacquiao>Thurman

[Chrismart]

I can only go by who you beat. I'd look at who the opponent was and put it into perspective. Be it a unification fight, or lineal.
Same goes for when guys win titles in multiple weight-classes.

Personally, i'm more excited to see a undisputed / unified champion over a lineal.

For me Unification fights like Thurman/Garcia and Postol/Crawford are events.
Some upcoming fights where the lineal is at stake like Canelo/Chavez , and Stevenson's next fight..don't engage me just because the lineal is on the line.