Define common boxing terms / words such as bums, journeymen and etc

[Mr Objecitivity]

I still disagree if you are suggesting that defending any belt 10 times would make someone lineal champ. The problem is, all the belts have different ranking systems and they don't always overlap. Imo, unifying the division is the only way...that is of course unless we recognize ring or trbr as legit.

Unification isn't the only way it would work because sometimes a champion might not even be better than a contender. Such as Joseph Parker being arguably inferior to Kubrat Pulev or Alexander Povetkin. And one of the champs may have only been able to gain their title due to being lucky by perhaps fighting for a vacant belt which one of the other contenders who are even better as a boxer may not have had the luck and the opportunity to fight for. Thus, beating a champion and unifying the title doesn't necessarily mean you are the lineal champion because you are still yet to face another boxer who may not be the champion, but is superior as a boxer to the champion that you beat.

Thus, the only way to become the lineal champion is to clean up the division. And to do this, beating at least one other champion to possess most titles in the division, along with defeating at least 10 mandatory challengers ranked in the top 10 is more or less akin to cleaning up the division and thus being qualified to earn the 'lineal champion' title.

Unless you have a different criteria to determine when a boxer may have "cleaned" up their division or you disagree with cleaning up the division being sufficient enough?

[Real King Kong]

Unification isn't the only way it would work because sometimes a champion might not even be better than a contender. Such as Joseph Parker being arguably inferior to Kubrat Pulev or Alexander Povetkin. And one of the champs may have only been able to gain their title due to being lucky by perhaps fighting for a vacant belt which one of the other contenders who are even better as a boxer may not have had the luck and the opportunity to fight for. Thus, beating a champion and unifying the title doesn't necessarily mean you are the lineal champion because you are still yet to face another boxer who may not be the champion, but is superior as a boxer to the champion that you beat.

Thus, the only way to become the lineal champion is to clean up the division. And to do this, beating at least one other champion to possess most titles in the division, along with defeating at least 10 mandatory challengers ranked in the top 10 is more or less akin to cleaning up the division and thus being qualified to earn the 'lineal champion' title.

Unless you have a different criteria to determine when a boxer may have "cleaned" up their division or you disagree with cleaning up the division being sufficient enough?

The problem is if a guy is only beating top contenders in one sanctioning body...there's no guarantee he's gonna face the top contenders in other sanctioning body rankings. The tbrb rankings and champions are more legit than that scenario.

There's always gonna be new contenders coming up, but if a fighter unifies all the belts, he's cleaned out the division at that particular time. Even that doesn't even really matter if the champ isn't facing top contenders, which is why without returning to one title per division, the term lineal champ doesn't have much purpose these days.

[Mr Objecitivity]

The problem is if a guy is only beating top contenders in one sanctioning body...there's no guarantee he's gonna face the top contenders in other sanctioning body rankings. The tbrb rankings and champions are more legit than that scenario.

There's always gonna be new contenders coming up, but if a fighter unifies all the belts, he's cleaned out the division at that particular time. Even that doesn't even really matter if the champ isn't facing top contenders, which is why without returning to one title per division, the term lineal champ doesn't have much purpose these days.

I agree with some of your points! However, if a boxer holds the most belts in a weight division (even if he isn't undisputed) and cleans up at least one sanctioning body at a given time, then he is as good as a 'lineal champion' to me. I agree that complexity arises when there are so many sanctioning bodies and it wold be much simpler if there was only a single sanctioning body.

But merely being a unified champion isn't enough to be considered a 'lineal champion' as far as I'm concerned. Since some contenders might be better boxers than a paper title holder (Luis Ortiz and Alexander Povetkin are arguably better than Joseph Parker).

And although the rankings differ from one sanctioning body to another sanctioning body. Most of the time, top 10 ranked boxers in one sanctioning body are also going to be ranked in the top 10 in another sanctioning body (barring exceptions). The difference will just be that most of the time, say one sanctioning body like WBC is going to have a boxer in number 3 whilst another sanctioning body like WBA are going to have the same boxer in number 6, despite both being in the top 10 of both sanctioning bodies. The differences are very marginable. It's very unlikely that you will find a boxer who is ranked 100 in one sanctioning body like the WBC whilst also ranked number 1 in another sanctioning body like WBA.

[Real King Kong]

I agree with some of your points! However, if a boxer holds the most belts in a weight division (even if he isn't undisputed) and cleans up at least one sanctioning body at a given time, then he is as good as a 'lineal champion' to me. I agree that complexity arises when there are so many sanctioning bodies and it wold be much simpler if there was only a single sanctioning body.

But merely being a unified champion isn't enough to be considered a 'lineal champion' as far as I'm concerned. Since some contenders might be better boxers than a paper title holder (Luis Ortiz and Alexander Povetkin are arguably better than Joseph Parker).

And although the rankings differ from one sanctioning body to another sanctioning body. Most of the time, top 10 ranked boxers in one sanctioning body are also going to be ranked in the top 10 in another sanctioning body (barring exceptions). The difference will just be that most of the time, say one sanctioning body like WBC is going to have a boxer in number 3 whilst another sanctioning body like WBA are going to have the same boxer in number 6, despite both being in the top 10 of both sanctioning bodies. The differences are very marginable. It's very unlikely that you will find a boxer who is ranked 100 in one sanctioning body like the WBC whilst also ranked number 1 in another sanctioning body like WBA.

Well the main thing is, if someone follows the sport, they know who the real guys are. All these belt holders and lineal champions are only as good as the competition they've beaten the get there. Without 1 true champion per division who is forced to defend against top contenders, it's all pretty well meaningless...and at the end of the day, making a new criteria for crowning lineal champions is equally pointless if they just sit on the title and don't face the top contenders. I'ts pretty well a lost cause imo.