Multi-weight champs vs. Undisputed champs? What is more impressive?

[lokkebassen123]

Lets say multi-division= 2-4 weight classes. Undisputed meaning every major belt - WBA, WBC, IBF og WBO. So with that said, in your honest opinion, in present day boxing, which should be respected more? & why??

[MPDKSAB]

Opponent levels matter.

[Luilun]

Undisputed I say because of having 4 belts the fighter can choose the weakest champ. Take a look at Broner he fought Paulie for his 4th division belt. Roy Jones fought John Ruiz for christ sake

[boliodogs]

Undisputed champion is about 100 times more impressive than multiweight champion. There are probably dozens of multiweight champs fighting right now but only two boxers that I know of have fully unified a weight class. In today's boxing each weight class has 4 champions or more of various quality and the weight classes are much closer together than in the past. A champion can become a multiweight champion by targeting the weakest of the champions and beating that champion to become a multiweight champion. That is what Canelo did when he beat Fielding and Kovalev. To fully unify a weight class you must beat all the champions including the best ones. That is a hell of a lot harder to do. A 112 pound champion could beat the weakest 115 pound champion and then beat the weakest 118 pound champion and become a three weight champion just by moving up 6 pounds and beating two lesser champions.

[PRINCEKOOL]

Undisputed.

What is so impressive about weight draining yourself 'Then deciding to NOT weight drain yourself to progressed through the weight divisions?'.

90% of the fighters who OVERLY weight drain themselves are weasels, and want a advantage over their opponents.

[MehdiQaos]

undisputed of coure, even broner and malinagi were multi-division champs

[Marchegiano]

I favor undisputed myself.

I'm not real sure why lineal gets equated with undisputed from time to time, but I do understand those who see title holders as claimants.

There were other HW champions of the world in Sullivan's era who were not John L. Those champions are not considered Lineal because Lineal is who historians choose as the most legitimate champion of an era. Those champions are called claimants today.

I'm pretty sure Fury would demolish Joshua in a poll here. I'm fairly certain Fury is seen today as the more legitimate HW champion of the two. Which makes Joshua a claimant.

Which is why I like undisputed so much. People ***** whine in cry about the bodies like 4 champs is a lot when before bodies every mother ****er with a rich backer was some kind of champion. Undisputed gives us what history before it never did. One clear, inarguable, champion.

[Zaryu]

In this day and age undisputed is hands down more impressive than being a multi weight Champion.

Back in the one (maybe two) world title days per weightclass, being a multiple weight champion (with less weight classes too) was very impressive. Today, in theory, you could be the fourth best fighter in three divisions and be a triple weight world champion.

Becoming an undisputed champion today is the equivalent of being a world champion in the one belt era. It means you would have had to fight the best fighters in the division to win the belt, and you would need to continue facing the best available challengers to keep your champion status.

[_Rexy_]

undisputed. You can win a title in multiple weight classes by fighting ****ing nobody (Andrade comes to mind) guys do it all the time. Win a vacant belt, hold it, then once a mandatory is difficult they move up in weight and pick up the next vacant belt. With four champs per division there's basically a paper champ in each weight class. Undisputed is being the actual one champion at a weight class. The king of the division.

[Larry the boss]

Both depends on who you defeated for your titles