Lineal Heavyweight title is "bull****"?

[OnlytheTruth]

You realize that unlike UK fanboys, we don't feel the need to believe every single thing our side says.

You're backing 50% of the argument.
So there is the potential that you can be wrong on that 50% which means you are only right 25% of the time.
There's a 1 in 4 chance you are right.
There are 4 recognised HW titles.
Your boyfriend; Wilder, has 1 of the 4 titles.

It all makes sense now.

ILLUMINATI.

[billeau2]

I definitely agree with the bold

where we (possibly?) differ is... fans blindly using lineage to draw conclusions are not "informed"

look what happened when The Ring tried that rubbish.....



other than Canelo, other glaring examples that are relevant to fans of todays era are Adonis Stevenson, and Shannon Briggs

It goes right to the heart of M's point: In a "perfect world" the lineal rules should make clarity and not be exploited, however, in actuality, the system is abused considerably. History apparently shows us this is the case.

I always look at issues of regulation carefully because rather than an absolute, they should be treated like monitering the swing of a pendulum. For example, if we have a truly open financial market with no "oppressive Government" intrusion what happens? People get fleeced, the market in its greed creates crisis that involve trillions of dollars. On the other hand with too much regulation, we don't have a free market. Obviously we need some regulation. Somewhere in Plato's perfect world, far away from Hobb's nasty, brutish, short lived human beings, is a perfect balance of regulation and activity... vis a vis, a pendulum that goes back and fourth between the two poles, swinging at the perfect arc.

Boxing is the same IMO. We need regulation. the real issue is how much of this is self serving and how much of it translates as for the good of the sport.

M makes another point which is dreadful but true: King, one of the worse serial abusers of fighters put on the best cards and presided over the most competative age in the sport: the golden seventies. Is it the case that we need to have people like King around to have the fighters fight the best competition? What we see now is avoidance strategies that are perhaps great for the fighter's pocketbooks, but hardly worth it for the fans...

It is a real complex calculus... I do not believe there is a simple solution to these problems. I think that is why I pine for the simplicity and elogence of the Lineal.

[N/A]

Because he was an HBO fighter at the time and was being paid handsomely by them and had he taken that fight, he would have given that up. Not hard to get really

Two problems.

#1 - He didn't become mandatory until his HBO contract had expired.

#2 - Why ask to be named mandatory with a 50/50 split if you're not going to take the fight?

[Boxing Goat]

Two problems.

#1 - He didn't become mandatory until his HBO contract had expired.

#2 - Why ask to be named mandatory with a 50/50 split if you're not going to take the fight?

Both of those are obvious answers. You can have this last response but that's it.

1) They were obviously not going to another broadcaster because HBO was still #1 in the industry at the time so it would be ******.

2) Stevenson had recently signed with PBC prior to Kovalev's contract expiring with HBO when he could have also signed and made the fight. So that goes both ways.

The end as far as i am concerned.

[aboutfkntime]

I have no clue how you've misconstrued semantics to mean anything bud definition thumping.

That is my point, all you're doing is definition thumping. You can't relate Egypt to present boxing because it is unrelated.

riiiiiiight, so...

one man, punching another man... with his fists... while evading the other mans blows... back then

is totally unrelated to... one man, punching another man... with his fists... while evading the other mans blows... now



uh, I will go with the experts on that one

[aboutfkntime]

It goes right to the heart of M's point: In a "perfect world" the lineal rules should make clarity and not be exploited, however, in actuality, the system is abused considerably. History apparently shows us this is the case.

I always look at issues of regulation carefully because rather than an absolute, they should be treated like monitering the swing of a pendulum. For example, if we have a truly open financial market with no "oppressive Government" intrusion what happens? People get fleeced, the market in its greed creates crisis that involve trillions of dollars. On the other hand with too much regulation, we don't have a free market. Obviously we need some regulation. Somewhere in Plato's perfect world, far away from Hobb's nasty, brutish, short lived human beings, is a perfect balance of regulation and activity... vis a vis, a pendulum that goes back and fourth between the two poles, swinging at the perfect arc.

Boxing is the same IMO. We need regulation. the real issue is how much of this is self serving and how much of it translates as for the good of the sport.

M makes another point which is dreadful but true: King, one of the worse serial abusers of fighters put on the best cards and presided over the most competative age in the sport: the golden seventies. Is it the case that we need to have people like King around to have the fighters fight the best competition? What we see now is avoidance strategies that are perhaps great for the fighter's pocketbooks, but hardly worth it for the fans...

It is a real complex calculus... I do not believe there is a simple solution to these problems. I think that is why I pine for the simplicity and elogence of the Lineal.

no, the system is flawed, permanently

well-known sayings/situations in boxing...

* triangle-theories do not work
* the belt does not make the fighter, the fighter makes the belt
* you win (and forge a claim to greatness) in the ring, not on paper

all of those sayings/situations render ranking by lineage nothing but flawed logic, which is why it is OFTEN inaccurate

there are PLENTY more examples than the two I gave above

lineage is either 100% valid... or it is not valid AT ALL... there is no "oh, but..."

your point about regulation is great, and correct... but ranking by lineage does not even address that issue, let alone fix it... it is a poor sub-standard solution, no matter which way you look

[N/A]

1) They were obviously not going to another broadcaster because HBO was still #1 in the industry at the time so it would be ******.

HBO was no longer #1 when Kovalev resigned, which is why he had no confidence they could win the purse bid. Regardless, it still doesn't explain demanding to be made mandatory, demanding 50/50, and then when Stevenson agrees, refusing to do the fight. And then lying and saying your HBO contract prevents it, even though your HBO contract has already expired.

Fans never want to accept the truth when it's their fighter that ducked, but facts are facts. Stevenson accepted the fight. Kovalev ducked.

2) Stevenson had recently signed with PBC prior to Kovalev's contract expiring with HBO when he could have also signed and made the fight. So that goes both ways.

No it doesn't go both ways. When Stevenson switched to Showtime in hopes of fighting Bernard Hopkins, Hopkins was rated above Kovalev and considered the more dangerous fight. Hopkins had the IBF belt and was about to win the WBA belt. Kovalev still only had the less regarded WBO version.

Stevenson was a restricted free agent and had an obligation to present an offer to HBO to either match or not match. HBO let Showtime win over a measly 50k.

It's not "ducking" when HBO refuses to do the fight. It's not "ducking" to choose what's considered the tougher fight, against a bigger name, for more belts.

It is ducking to demand a fight, be given everything you asked for, and then still refuse to fight.

[billeau2]

no, the system is flawed, permanently

well-known sayings/situations in boxing...

* triangle-theories do not work
* the belt does not make the fighter, the fighter makes the belt
* you win (and forge a claim to greatness) in the ring, not on paper

all of those sayings/situations render ranking by lineage nothing but flawed logic, which is why it is OFTEN inaccurate

there are PLENTY more examples than the two I gave above

lineage is either 100% valid... or it is not valid AT ALL... there is no "oh, but..."

your point about regulation is great, and correct... but ranking by lineage does not even address that issue, let alone fix it... it is a poor sub-standard solution, no matter which way you look

well...I take issue with this because i come from a martial arts background. People have been able to do a lot with lineages, historically and otherwise in Japan. That is why we can practice an art that existed in the 1600's, with all the intricacies that existed then.

It is also why you have rankings that are generally well respected in these arts. Of course this is not a perfect system, there are problems like rank inflation, selling scrolls to system collectors, etc. But the system works, and is only reinforced, and validated by state authorities.

Aside from that it becomes semantic because systems are created by people, so whether it is the system, or people, is kind of a moot point.

As regards boxing, I don't know why the lineal can't exist in its own place, and why it must either be totally accurate, or not in effect. It does not really hurt anything if we acknowledge its limitations and past performance that I can see.

I do recognize the points made regarding the legitimacy of the Lineal... Just do not want to throw the baby out with the bath water lol.

[N/A]

I don't know why the lineal can't exist in its own place, and why it must either be totally accurate, or not in effect.

Because Anthony Joshua isn't the lineal champion, so it must be treated as worthless by the UK fanboys. Plain and simple. These are people that are pretending that the IBO is a recognized world championship. They are delusional.

[aboutfkntime]

well...I take issue with this because i come from a martial arts background. People have been able to do a lot with lineages, historically and otherwise in Japan. That is why we can practice an art that existed in the 1600's, with all the intricacies that existed then.

It is also why you have rankings that are generally well respected in these arts. Of course this is not a perfect system, there are problems like rank inflation, selling scrolls to system collectors, etc. But the system works, and is only reinforced, and validated by state authorities.

Aside from that it becomes semantic because systems are created by people, so whether it is the system, or people, is kind of a moot point.

As regards boxing, I don't know why the lineal can't exist in its own place, and why it must either be totally accurate, or not in effect. It does not really hurt anything if we acknowledge its limitations and past performance that I can see.

I do recognize the points made regarding the legitimacy of the Lineal... Just do not want to throw the baby out with the bath water lol.

" I don't know why the lineal can't exist in its own place "

it can, and does...




" why it must either be totally accurate, or not in effect "

because... something that is not accurate, is shlt...

that applies to business, politics, relationships, sport... and, life in general

accuracy is everything

and, the Canelo example was not inaccurate... it was ridiculous

same as the Briggs example, that is ridiculous

same as many others