Is this the correct order of the Heavyweight titles?

[Robbie Barrett]

Canelo will also be stripped in May

Isn't it 18 months before they strip? The Khan fight was last May.

[original zero]

From most to least prestigious, reading from top to bottom.

Lineal - Tyson Fury
RING - Tyson Fury
WBC - Deontay Wilder
WBA Super - Anthony Joshua or Wladimir Klitschko
IBF - Anthony Joshua
WBO - Joseph Parker

Everybody decides for themselves the importance they place on an accomplishment. But if you're asking what the marketplace has determined the order of importance is, it looks nothing like your list.

First of all, the Ring title is literally owned by Canelo's promoter. It's literally worthless and an absolute joke. For you to have it so high on your list calls into question the sincerity of your entire post.

Second of all, the mythical "lineal" title is largely irrelevant these days, especially when the lineage does not begin with an undisputed champion.

So the real order is probably WBC, IBF, WBA, Lineal, WBO and then Ring.

Once the WBA gets rid of the super title, the WBA will probably surpass the IBF.

[Sadiqkingofko]

Isn't it 18 months before they strip? The Khan fight was last May.

Yeah but Khan wasn't top 5 or top 10 in the middleweight division, he's still Lineal like Stevenson but with no RING title

[original zero]

There is currently no differentiation between organisation titles

The industry and the marketplace say different. There is a clear clear difference. The WBC championship is worth far more than the WBO championship, just as the WBO championship is worth far more than the WBU championship.

Just because Arum hides all his fighters behind WBOgus belts and Pacquiao is a bigger star than Thurman doesn't change the fact that overall, the WBO title has the least value among the four recognized organizations.

The IBF rankings are abysmal because the IBF enforces their rules no matter who you are, so generally, the bigger stars avoid fighting for the IBF.

We have four recognized leagues in boxing. To say the prestige of all of them is equal is ridiculous. It's like saying winning the Austrlian open is just as prestigious as winning Wimbledon. It's simply not true.

[Robbie Barrett]

Yeah but Khan wasn't top 5 or top 10 in the middleweight division, he's still Lineal like Stevenson but with no RING title

It's 2 years without fighting a top 5 before they strip.

"THE RING’s Nos. 1 and 2 contenders fight one another.
If the Nos. 1 and 2 contenders chose not to fight one another and either of them fights No. 3, No. 4 or No. 5, the winner may be awarded THE RING belt if the Editorial Board deems the contenders worthy. Here are the seven situations in which a champion can lose his belt:
The Champion loses a fight in the weight class in which he is champion.
The Champion moves to another weight class.
The Champion does not schedule a fight in any weight class for 18 months.
The Champion does not schedule a fight at his championship weight for 18 months (even if he fights at another weight).
The Champion does not schedule a fight with a Top-5 contender from any weight class for two years.
The Champion retires.
The Champion tests positive for a performance-enhancing substance."

http://www.******.com/ratings/

[techliam]

The industry and the marketplace say different. There is a clear clear difference. The WBC championship is worth far more than the WBO championship, just as the WBO championship is worth far more than the WBU championship.

Just because Arum hides all his fighters behind WBOgus belts and Pacquiao is a bigger star than Thurman doesn't change the fact that overall, the WBO title has the least value among the four recognized organizations.

The IBF rankings are abysmal because the IBF enforces their rules no matter who you are, so generally, the bigger stars avoid fighting for the IBF.

We have four recognized leagues in boxing. To say the prestige of all of them is equal is ridiculous. It's like saying winning the Austrlian open is just as prestigious as winning Wimbledon. It's simply not true.

So were Pacquiao and Garcia held to different standards at the weight? Garcia was the Wimbledon champion, but Pacquiao had the lesser Australian championship. Or is it your example doesn't quite fit the situation?

The prestige of the title is linked to the prestige of the fighter. The prestige of all the organisations are questionable, but all are recognised equally by the institutions of boxing, whether its the promoter, the HOF, the fans or the history books (depending on time of recognition).

I'd like to see your evidence in regards to the industry and marketplace which you use for your argument. Historically, the WBC was worth quite a lot. Today however, no-one distinguishes them. They all play an equal role - crowning a 'world champion'. Let me know

[original zero]

The prestige of all the organisations are questionable, but all are recognised equally by the institutions of boxing, whether its the promoter, the HOF, the fans or the history books

Wrong. Promoters know very well that WBC belts are worth far more than WBO belts. Just look at the purse bids. You're an idiot.

[techliam]

Wrong. Promoters know very well that WBC belts are worth far more than WBO belts. Just look at the purse bids. You're an idiot.

Still waiting on that marketplace evidence - that in the modern times, the WBC is the most prestigious. I assume you don't have any, as you've reverted to childlike personal attacks.

Purse bids aren't exactly an accurate representation if most higher purse fights are made under voluntary agreements.

[original zero]

Still waiting on that marketplace evidence - that in the modern times, the WBC is the most prestigious. I assume you don't have any, as you've reverted to childlike personal attacks.

Purse bids aren't exactly an accurate representation if most higher purse fights are made under voluntary agreements.

when one organization consistently has the highest purse bid average and another organization consistently has the lowest purse bid average, it's very clear that you're wrong about promoters considering all four belts to be equal . . .

[Jewish-Reptile]

Parker has fought better quality opposition than Wilder and Joshua put together, the Kiwi is the man to beat.