Is it wrong for ESPN+Showtime to acknowledge Fury as Lineal Champion?

[davefromvancouv]

Joshua was the consensus #1, that made him the man.


Doesn't work like that. Check your history, fighters like Mayweather didn't get lineal back after a temporary retirement. Funny you started talking about boxing history and don't know simple stuff like this.

Again, read the article from Cliff Rold to understand what "the man" means (https://www.boxingscene.com/lineage-...weight--134150). It's not the consensus #1. It's the man who beat the man. It's the winner of the consensus #1 and #2 if "the man" retires. Klitschko became "the man" when he beat Povetkin after Vitali's last fight and, more conclusively, when he beat Pulev after Vitali's "official" retirement. Fury became "the man" when he beat Klitschko and he's still fighting so, OBVIOUSLY, "the man" is not retired. Same thing happened with Jim Jefferies when he came back to fight Jack Johnson. Jefferies came back to nullify Joshson's claim to the lineage and Johnson had to beat him to solidify his claim. Same thing happened to Muhammad Ali after he was banned for refusing to fight in Vietnam. People claimed Frazier was "the man" during Ali's hiatus, but Ali was still considered "the man" in the Fight Of The Century. Now we have Fury haters and Joshua fans claiming Joshua was "the man". But Fury can do whatever he wants and take as much time off as he wants. He's still "the man" until beaten in the ring, just like Jefferies was before his fight with Johnson and just like Ali before his fight with Frazier.

[sensfulviolence]

I understand what the folks who argue "the man who beat the man" are saying - until you lose in the ring, you're still lineal.

However, I disagree with the premise.

IMO, 2 years is too long to not defend. The lineal title is vacant IMO.

If anyone of Fury, Wilder or the Ruiz/AJ II winner beats one of the other, thats my new lineal.

[Robbie Barrett]

Again, read the article from Cliff Rold to understand what "the man" means (https://www.boxingscene.com/lineage-...weight--134150). It's not the consensus #1. It's the man who beat the man. It's the winner of the consensus #1 and #2 if "the man" retires. Klitschko became "the man" when he beat Povetkin after Vitali's last fight and, more conclusively, when he beat Pulev after Vitali's "official" retirement. Fury became "the man" when he beat Klitschko and he's still fighting so, OBVIOUSLY, "the man" is not retired. Same thing happened with Jim Jefferies when he came back to fight Jack Johnson. Jefferies came back to nullify Joshson's claim to the lineage and Johnson had to beat him to solidify his claim. Same thing happened to Muhammad Ali after he was banned for refusing to fight in Vietnam. People claimed Frazier was "the man" during Ali's hiatus, but Ali was still considered "the man" in the Fight Of The Century. Now we have Fury haters and Joshua fans claiming Joshua was "the man". But Fury can do whatever he wants and take as much time off as he wants. He's still "the man" until beaten in the ring, just like Jefferies was before his fight with Johnson and just like Ali before his fight with Frazier.

You are talking about lineal. Joshua wasn't lineal but was the consensus #1 which made him the man to beat.

Jeffries and Ali weren't lineal when they came back Johnson and Frazier were (go check the history books), thanks for giving me more example's of a fighter losing lineal outside the ring. You keep buying in to the marketing, real boxing fans know Fury isn't lineal.

[davefromvancouv]

You are talking about lineal. Joshua wasn't lineal but was the consensus #1 which made him the man to beat.

Jeffries and Ali weren't lineal when they came back Johnson and Frazier were (go check the history books), thanks for giving me more example's of a fighter losing lineal outside the ring. You keep buying in to the marketing, real boxing fans know Fury isn't lineal.

Yes, the history books explain the bias that you now have about Fury, instead of accepting the reality of what actually happened in the ring.

Jefferies:
"Because Jeffries had retired undefeated and had not actually ‘lost’ his heavyweight title, many felt he remained the true champion. "

https://www.thefightcity.com/july-4-1910-johnson-vs-jeffries-jack-johnson-james-jeffries-corbett-sullivan-tommy-burns-fight-of-the-century/

Ali:
"He made nine defenses between 1965 and '67 before he was stripped of his titles after being found guilty on draft evasion charges. He'd eventually lose the lineal title in the ring to Joe Frazier in 1971."

https://www.si.com/boxing/photos/2012/11/12lineal-heavyweight-champions#20

"In many minds Ali remained the genuine heavyweight champion of the world because he never lost his title to another fighter inside the ring." (ringtv link)
https://www.******.com/181567-ali-quarry-remembered/

Fury:
"Tyson Fury (27-0, 19 KO) doesn’t have a major sanctioning body title. For them, he doesn’t need one. He’s the man who beat the man."

https://www.boxingscene.com/lineage-matters-most-heavyweight--134150

"We deeply regret separating from the lineal championship and we would hope that fans appreciate our reasons for giving Tyson every opportunity over the past two years. We wish our former champion the very best for the future and we will be happy to re-rank him when appropriate." (ringtv link)
https://www.******.com/527524-tyson-...drops-ratings/

[Thuglife Nelo]

What's wrong with what i posted? I didn't say Joshua was lineal.

I don't need it explaining. You do. When a fighter retires the lineage is broken.

You implied that Joshua was "the man" when he never was, as explained in the article that you probably never read. Fury is back so the lineage is his until he's beaten or until he "officially" retires.

Basically this Robbie. Ideally retirement as in the guy is old and never returns, Fury is exempt from that. Even if you use Floyd as losing Lineal, when he came back he told ESPN he was still the Man and industry acknowledged it. How does that not apply to Fury?

[sensfulviolence]

Here's my view -- Lineal DOES NOT make you "the Man" in the division -- especially if a dude can hang onto lineal w/out significant defenses.

I mean, look at Adonis Stevenson -- he was legit the lineal champ at 175 for years when dudes like Ward & Kovalev were clearly better than him.

So you can call someone lineal if you want, and apply any rules you want to it. Lineal doesnt mean much to me.

IMO, Fury is NOT the Man at HW, bc he didnt fight for 2 years. The sport continued w/out him and THE MAN at HW became vacant, and it remains vacant.

If one of top 3 dudes at HW beats another - thats the new lineal for me.

[Thuglife Nelo]

I mean, look at Adonis Stevenson -- he was legit the lineal champ at 175 for years when dudes like Ward & Kovalev were clearly better than him.

lol..

First off, when Ward assured Froch to his face that Edison Miranda could “crack,” which he could and was very heavy handed... to then Ward seeing how Adonis handled Chad Dawson at the full 175 in the first round..who too has Heavy Handed Power, you still think “dudes” like Ward or Kovalev didn’t think twice? Gvozdyk a mean dude even for Kovalev..

It’s not completely far fetched that Ward knew it was risky to fight Adonis. Undisputed never happened, and industry never singled out Adonis out of the picture.

The man to beat is Gvozdyk over all the 175 guys. Still think Lineal don’t matter? Lol