Klitchko Wasnt A Unification Bout Says Wilder

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

I told you DUMBIUM im from the west side .

No you’re just a complete and utter degenerate...

Learn how to spell ******.

“Klitchko”😭😭😭😭😭😭

[juggernaut666]

Klitchko wasn't either lol.

Alright bye Felicia. I can't deal with your fanboy-ism. Sh^t is embarrassing to see grown dudes all up on a fighters ****.

Hope this fight happens despite the fanboys of each guy.

Klitchko didnt need to have any belt ,bc there were two others up for grabs making the winner a UNIFIED champion .

Which made it a UNIFICATION bout . Its not fanboyism its what WAS .....

[Pigeons]

Are you a robot?

I need to get out more.

[kafkod]

Klitchko wasn't either lol.

Alright bye Felicia. I can't deal with your fanboy-ism. Sh^t is embarrassing to see grown dudes all up on a fighters ****.

Hope this fight happens despite the fanboys of each guy.

It was a unification fight because it would end with one guy as champion of both the IBF and the WBA, which wasn't the case when the fight was made.

[Eff Pandas]

It was a unification fight because it would end with one guy as champion of both the IBF and the WBA, which wasn't the case when the fight was made.

Never heard that ever in my life. Its SOMETHING different I'll give you that, but its clearly no unification fight.

A unifying can't happen with only one champ going in. It needs two mfers with one or more belt each. Otherwise what are we unifying exactly? I'd say not a damn thing.

Unification Fight

Describes a fight between two fighters who hold different belts under the jurisdiction of two different governing bodies.

http://www.sportsdefinitions.com/boxing/Unification-fight.html

[4truth]

Alabama education system -1
Anthony Joshua Marching and Chowder Society - zilch

[kafkod]

Never heard that ever in my life. Its SOMETHING different I'll give you that, but its clearly no unification fight.

A unifying can't happen with only one champ going in. It needs two mfers with one or more belt each. Otherwise what are we unifying exactly? I'd say not a damn thing.


http://www.sportsdefinitions.com/box...ion-fight.html

They need to amend that definition. It works for 99.99% of unification fights, but it doesn't include the possibility of a guy who already holds one or more belts fighting for a vacant title.

Look at it this way ... ignoring the IBO, AJ wasn't a unified champ before he fought Wlad. He only became a unified champ by winning the fight, therefore, it was a unificaton fight.

The IBF viewed it as a unification, that's why they agreed to allow AJ to fight Wlad for the WBA instead of their mando, Pulev, without stripping him.

When you think about it, "title unification" is a misnomer, or a misleading term, because the titles don't actually get unified, they just wind up being temporarily held by the same fighter.

[Tom Cruise]

So Joshua vs Takam was a unification fight?

No because the titles were already unified.

[Eff Pandas]

He only became a unified champ by winning the fight, therefore, it was a unificaton fight.

Yea....noooooooooo. LOL.

Like I said the basic requirement of a unification is two fighters with one or more title each fighting each other. This isn't something in dispute by anyone ever except people in this very thread for some reason. I've never even heard this argument or mentioned with any other fighter.

Although it is a rare situation I'd admit cuz I don't even recall a situation where a champion fought another guy for a vacant 2nd belt although I'm sure it has happened before.

But okay if you got two belts than yes you are a unified title holder, BUT if you did it via winning a vacant title vs a non-title holder you didn't gain that status with a unification fight. So no unified status doesn't necessarily need a unification fight to get there.

[DuckAdonis]

Yes it was wilder