Which heavyweight title lineage do you consider the most prestigious?

[famicommander]

You linked to an article speculating that Fury was retiring. Fury didn't actually say he was retiring. He said:

"Thanks to all the fans that supported & believed in me along the way. Hope you enjoy it as much as I did. The end."

The end of what? The end of his tweet? The end of his life? The end of his career? Is he threatening retirement or is he threatening suicide? Or is he simply saying "the end" as in the end of his statement?

If that was your justification for stripping him, good for you, but most disagree with you and still recognize him as lineal champion. Ring Magazine didn't strip him until 7 months after the tweet you linked to. So clearly they didn't consider him retired based on that tweet.

The Ring split with the lineal title years prior to that and you know it.

the TBRB and CBZ are the two biggest authorities on the lineal title and both of them consider the heavyweight title vacant.

[Articulateboxin]

WBC heavyweight champions are undefeated in unification fights. Over and over, when given the chance, the WBC champion has proven superior to the others.

I sincerely and genuinely hope this perspective doesn't change when Wilder relinquishes / loses the WBC strap. I have been fooled by your rhetoric prior. I am convinced this cannot all be one giant attempt to coerce people into thinking "Wilder is the best"

As it stands, 1 individual belt has very little relation to who is the best champion. A very recent and quick example of this is Tyson Fury currently holding 0 belts but widely accepted as the best HW in the division since he won more rounds against Wilder, the only other undefeated fighter in the division.

(full disclosure, I actually scored the fight a draw, but the general conses seems to be that Fury won the fight)

Thus far, the boxing world has refused to recognize the Franchise title as a world championship. The "Franchise champion" can't lose the title in the ring. So how can it be a world title? If you beat the Franchise champion, you become the diamond champion, not the world champion, and the Franchise champion remains Franchise champion despite the loss.

Well I agree entirely and so destroys the credibility of the current "world champion" because they are no longer the best fighter in the belts own rankings. This of course inturn lowers the credibility of the belt itself, since it's now being held by a non champion.

[N/A]

The Ring split with the lineal title years prior to that and you know it.

But Ring also strips you for retiring. Yet they didn't strip Fury for writing "the end." So clearly they didn't consider that a retirement announcement.

the TBRB and CBZ are the two biggest authorities on the lineal title and both of them consider the heavyweight title vacant.

No, the public is the biggest authority on the lineal title and the public considers Fury the lineal champion. That's the whole point of the lineal title. Nobody controls it except for the public.

Whether you consider Fury lineal champion or not, he has the Klitschko lineage. If you want to break the lineage, go ahead, but Fury is still active and fighting and defending Wladimir's scalp.

[MDPopescu]

... These days, "lineality" looks more "poetic" than "factual"...

[N/A]

I sincerely and genuinely hope this perspective doesn't change when Wilder relinquishes / loses the WBC strap. I have been fooled by your rhetoric prior. I am convinced this cannot all be one giant attempt to coerce people into thinking "Wilder is the best"

Wilder isn't going to vacate. He may lose. If he loses to the better man, it doesn't harm the prestige of the WBC title. The WBC heavyweight title has clearly been the most prestigious heavyweight title of my lifetime (I was born in '83), with or without Wilder. Wilder holding the title for five years hasn't hurt though. In that time, the other three belts have all been stripped or vacated.

Tyson Fury currently holding 0 belts but widely accepted as the best HW in the division

ESPN has Deontay Wilder rated higher than Tyson Fury.

Boxrec has Deontay Wilder rated higher than Tyson Fury.

TBRB has Deontay Wilder rated higher than Tyson Fury.

[_Rexy_]

IBF is the prettiest one

[Citizen Koba]

I sincerely and genuinely hope this perspective doesn't change when Wilder relinquishes / loses the WBC strap. I have been fooled by your rhetoric prior. I am convinced this cannot all be one giant attempt to coerce people into thinking "Wilder is the best"

As it stands, 1 individual belt has very little relation to who is the best champion. A very recent and quick example of this is Tyson Fury currently holding 0 belts but widely accepted as the best HW in the division since he won more rounds against Wilder, the only other undefeated fighter in the division.

(full disclosure, I actually scored the fight a draw, but the general conses seems to be that Fury won the fight)



Well I agree entirely and so destroys the credibility of the current "world champion" because they are no longer the best fighter in the belts own rankings. This of course inturn lowers the credibility of the belt itself, since it's now being held by a non champion.

Really? Funny thing is that's pretty much exactly what I'm taking from this thread made by this poster. I don't dislike the WBC dude, but his agenda is almost always embarassingly transparent. That said it is still a genuine and worthwhile discussion so I ain't really gonna take issue with it.

What I would say is that the quality if the historical lineage does not necesarily correlate to the quality of any given champion at any particular moment in time however, so as an argument to bolster the legitimacy of this or that titlist it ain't very useful, but as a general debate in it's own right it's not without interest.

[Marchegiano]

I don't care for these lists.

The WBA and WBC go back to the beginning. The official NBA title is the WBA title. The official NSC, IBU, and NYSAC titles are now the WBC titles.

From Johnson(at least) to present should be listed for WBC

From Dempsey to present for WBA.


Also, having multi belt holders in every list just muddies the waters. Who got which title first and then took the remaining titles from their champions says a lot about who crowned the best champion.

Just my two cents, not saying the thread is bad, I like it, just woulda done it differently.



That said...history time:

Fury publicly declared his retirement multiple times. That vacates the lineal title.

Just like how Pacquiao vacated the lineal welterweight title upon retirement, even though he returned to the ring mere months later.

Otherwise, Bud Crawford would be considered lineal welterweight champion and nobody considers him that. Because Horn beat Pacquiao, who won the vacant lineal welterweight title against Tim Bradley and then retired. But in the same calendar year he returned, beat Jesse Vargas, then lost (by robbery, but that's beside the point) to Horn. And then Crawford beat Horn.

But because Pacquiao retired, nobody considered him lineal champion when he lost to Horn. And thus Horn, and Crawford, were never lineal champion.

The TBRB and CBZ both consider the lineal heavyweight title to be vacant.

The only ones who still consider Fury lineal champion are people involved with the promotion of his fights.

This is just ****ing terrible. Anyway looking to claim CBZ and TBRB are the keepers and honest tellers of lineal needs to come correct 'cause I got issues with their narrative.


How is it Fury can vacate the title but Corbett can't?

How is there are any lineal champions in any division outside of HW when lineal is decidedly a title not bound by sanctioning bodies AND sanctioning bodies ALONE made said weight divisions?

That's not a champion if not for sanctioning bodies, that is a champion because of sanctioning bodies. Just because they are your fav yo doesn't make them lineal.


Find me ANYTHING from Sullivan's actual era that claims when lineal is vacant the number one and number two of the era fight for the vacancy. One and two came from bodies not lineal! Lineal say the champ chooses who is next, period and end of.



The only reason CBZ and TBRB enjoy status as keepers of history is because they go unchecked. There's not many with the knowledge to call them out on their bull**** and just about everyone uses their websites to check not question. If I asked you who was champion in 1830 your ass would hope on CBZ and check and report, not question and research their sources. Which is a problem because CBZ and TBRB are a den of plagiarists going back to guys like Fleischer and Fox who printed **** in books they sourced from materials like newspapers that don't actually say what is claimed. Yes, the highest form of bull****, just making **** up and spreading it unquestioned. Historians indeed.



Why do you think they flip flop position inside the same exact subject matter? Corbett is champion until Fitz beats him BUT Fury isn't champion because he retired in 2016? How? How is that even possible if not just making **** up as we go along?


Marvin Hart was champion because he fought the number 2 of his era did he? Not dissing Hart, but, Root isn't even one of his higher regarded resume wins Maher, Johnson, and Gardner are his big wins with Root playing a supporting role.


Hart is champion because Jeffries said he wants Hart vs Root for the title, he reffed the match, he awarded Hart his belt when Hart won, nothing to do with ANY ranking body.

[ShaneMosleySr]

Lineal. TBRB/Ring before De La Hoya

[rolshans]

Boy, this thread failed.