Why do we recognize any champion who isn’t lineal?

[aboutfkntime]

What historians don’t recognize lineal champions?

ABC titles and lineal titles didn’t even conflict with one another until the 1980s.

umm, no... lineal " titles " were not even relevant until the advent of multiple sanctioning bodies... before that point, there was no such thing... when there was only one title, EVERYONE knew who the champ was

" lineal "... is not a title

" lineal " is not mandated, or sanctioned... it is just another opinion

lineage is just a outdated triangle-theory

The Ring ranked Canelo the #1 middleweight on the planet... despite the fact that he had never fought above 155, and despite the fact that he had never faced a middleweight opponent...

ranking by lineage is just triangle-theory sillyness

[aboutfkntime]

Who became lineal champion without beating the champion or clearing out the division?

Canelo did... Golovkin was the champion, no question

when Canelo was ranked lineal champion, he had never faced a middleweight opponent

at the exact same point-in-time... The Ring ranked Adonis Stevenson the #1 LHW on the planet, because of lineage... despite the fact that Kovalev was the best LHW on the planet

ranking by lineage sucks

there are 5 " opinions "... and NONE of those opinions can justify being more relevant/accurate than the other... The Ring was the bible of boxing, because casual fans sought clarification... but those times have passed, now they are just another opinion

FACT: if a ABC organisation, or independent like The Ring, is not definitive... then they are just another opinion... and none of the 5 "opinions" are definitive

if anyone chooses to use any of those 5 systems, totally excluding the others... then they are wrong, because they picked a dog

[aboutfkntime]

Lineal is never as bad as the organizations. There isn’t one example of that ever being the case.

Lineage does get broken and the rule is clean out the division and you’re champion. Pretty simple.

Until Golden Boy Promotions bought Ring Magazine, I would absolutely leave it up to them. I trust boxing journalists to decided these things way more than I trust an ABC belt.

Not having a champion in a division is a good thing if the division hasn’t been cleared out by one guy. If that’s the case, there shouldn’t be a champion.

I voted in all of the boxingscene championship polls except for 122 because it left out lineal champion Guillermo Rigodeaux. I was also disappointed there wasn’t an option to pick no one since there isn’t always a champion in every division.

there are PLENTY of examples

lineage is flawed as hell

[club fighter]

I admit the multiple organizations that *ATTEMPT* to govern and control boxing are a joke and have done a lot of injustice to pro boxers with ranking, matchups, and generally just screwing up the sport we love.

... but the the term "Lineal Champ" is an even worse joke, only surfacing in recent years, to sell Tyson Fury fights.

Every time I hear an announcer mentioning it (Joe T) they lose credibility with me.

[DARTH SILKWORMS]

Let’s boycott all the titles and never talk about them again. Lineal championships are all that matter and it makes boxing much easier to follow.

People aren't always able to agree on how to fill a lineal vacancy. Even if you can get a consensus on who is #1 and who is #2, #1 and #2 are often unwilling to fight each other.

[famicommander]

I don't.

The WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO, and IBO award titles.

The TBRB and the Ring award real championships. The Ring lost their integrity unfortunately, but they're still better than the alphabet soups.

But the TBRB is the true keepers of the championship in boxing right now. They are the ones keeping track of the real lineal title now.

[ShaneMosleySr]

ABC belts don’t allow for fighters with other ABC belts to be mandatories (99.% of the time)

So those mandatories are pointless and ******.

Canelo was the middleweight champion because he beat Cotto who was the middleweight champion because he beat Martinez who was the middleweight champion because he beat Kelly Pavlik who was the middleweight champion because he beat Jermaine Taylor who was the middleweight champion because he beat Bernard Hopkins who was the middleweight champion because he won all the ABC belts.

I’m sorry you like Golovkin better than Canelo, but there’s no dis*****g that one.

umm, no... lineal " titles " were not even relevant until the advent of multiple sanctioning bodies... before that point, there was no such thing... when there was only one title, EVERYONE knew who the champ was

" lineal "... is not a title

" lineal " is not mandated, or sanctioned... it is just another opinion

lineage is just a outdated triangle-theory

The Ring ranked Canelo the #1 middleweight on the planet... despite the fact that he had never fought above 155, and despite the fact that he had never faced a middleweight opponent...

ranking by lineage is just triangle-theory sillyness

[ShaneMosleySr]

Canelo won the belt from Cotto who won the belt from Martinez who won the belt from Pavlik who won the belt from Taylor who won the belt from Bernard Hopkins.

Hopkins cleaned out the entire division.

It’s not an opinion, it’s the guy who beat the guy.

Adonis Stevenson beat Chad Dawson who beat Bernard Hopkins who beat Jean Pascal who beat Chad Dawson. That was a 1 vs. 2 battle because Dawson had won the WBC and IBF titles and cleared out the division by beating Antonio Tarver and Glen Johnson, who both beat Roy Jones.

Canelo did... Golovkin was the champion, no question

when Canelo was ranked lineal champion, he had never faced a middleweight opponent

at the exact same point-in-time... The Ring ranked Adonis Stevenson the #1 LHW on the planet, because of lineage... despite the fact that Kovalev was the best LHW on the planet

ranking by lineage sucks

there are 5 " opinions "... and NONE of those opinions can justify being more relevant/accurate than the other... The Ring was the bible of boxing, because casual fans sought clarification... but those times have passed, now they are just another opinion

FACT: if a ABC organisation, or independent like The Ring, is not definitive... then they are just another opinion... and none of the 5 "opinions" are definitive

if anyone chooses to use any of those 5 systems, totally excluding the others... then they are wrong, because they picked a dog

[ShaneMosleySr]

There isn’t a single respectable publication that considers Tyson Fury as the lineal heavyweight champion. He retired.

He’s the last lineal heavyweight champion but there isn’t one currently.

If the rules that applied to Tyson Fury applied everywhere, Terence Crawford would be the lineal welterweight champion of the world. ESPN doesn’t even call him that.

I admit the multiple organizations that *ATTEMPT* to govern and control boxing are a joke and have done a lot of injustice to pro boxers with ranking, matchups, and generally just screwing up the sport we love.

... but the the term "Lineal Champ" is an even worse joke, only surfacing in recent years, to sell Tyson Fury fights.

Every time I hear an announcer mentioning it (Joe T) they lose credibility with me.

[club fighter]

There isn’t a single respectable publication that considers Tyson Fury as the lineal heavyweight champion. He retired.

He’s the last lineal heavyweight champion but there isn’t one currently.

If the rules that applied to Tyson Fury applied everywhere, Terence Crawford would be the lineal welterweight champion of the world. ESPN doesn’t even call him that.

Nobody was talking about "respectable publications", and Joe T uses the term every other sentence when he babbles on about the heavyweight division.

Fact of the matter is there is no such thing, been watching the fight game since Frazier/Ali I, and I only heard of this "Lineal" crap when Fury gave up his belts and wanted them back.