Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Undisputed really such a great feat when a division is weak asf?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    People already planning excuses for Wilder's victory.

    Comment


    • #22
      135: Lineal, Ring, WBO
      140: Lineal, Ring, WBA (Super), WBC, IBF, WBO
      147: WBO

      At the lower weights Crawford's resume is fantastic. It's one thing to win an alphabet soup belt in multiple divisions, but to get the lineal title in multiple divisions is another entirely.

      It's 147 where he needs to do more. His next fight has to be against Pac, Thurman, Spence, Porter, Ugas, or Danny Garcia. Nobody else will do.

      Comment


      • #23
        If the div is weak, might as well have a top dog.

        Comment


        • #24
          Only 4 have done it. Hopkins, Taylor, Crawford and Usyk. Taylor just beat the guy that had already done it. So the politics of how hard it is to do didn't apply. Hopkins became undisputed in the three belt era and was so dedicated to fighting mandatories, never giving up belts, etc that he had the division on lock. But it was an era where there were a lot of undisputed champions. None of whom saw any need to then go pick up the unnecessary WBO. Hopkins just picked it up because of HBO's idea of doing a joint DLH/Hopkins PPV before they actually fought each other. The WBO meant next to nothing, but it still gave DLH something to do.

          So only two fighters have been 4 belt undisputed during the era where you actually needed all 4 to be undisputed. Crawford and Usyk.

          Once the WBSS signed all four champions, somebody was coming out of the tournament undisputed. Congrats to Usyk that he was clearly the best, but the political side of things was handled by WBSS and someone was going to be undisputed. Usyk just happened to be the beneficiary.

          Crawford didn't have the benefit of a tournament, but he did have the benefit of an in house fight to unify, and then a no name winning multiple upsets overseas to unify. Meaning it would be very easy politically to make an undisputed fight, especially with Crawford promising all of the sanctioning bodies that he would vacate after the fight.

          Becoming undisputed in the 4 belt era is very very difficult. Nearly impossible. The politics just don't allow it. Warren & Arum completely control the WBO. So good luck getting your hands on that belt.

          Comment


          • #25
            From my own personal point of view, I love to see unified champions. Undisputed..even better.

            In this day and age of boxing politics it's almost impossible to do. So props to those who can manage it.

            Of course, like everything else, be it unifying, lineal, undisputed or multi-weight titles, it comes down to who you fight and when you fight them. But undisputed is a tough thing to do, that's why so few do it.

            Comment


            • #26
              To unify titles to undisputed is a huge feat. It takes someone to actively go and chase the belts, make compromises, deal with the politics, and win out.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by historian larry View Post
                I have never praised his resume..but unlike GGG Crawford has moved up multiple divisions
                And his resume is still trash compare to GGG... Dont get me wrong, GGG resume was never P4P top 3 material... same for Crawford.

                Comment


                • #28
                  i give crawford sht too but lets not pretend people were not accusing him of ducking postol before that fight happened.. those threads are still up lol

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    You can't really use "Undisputed" as the ultimate yardstick. If you look at Joe Calzaghe for example. He won the WBO title and unified it with Jeff Lacy's IBF, also picking up the vacant RING title. By the time Calzaghe fought Mikkel Kessler, who held the other two belts (WBA Super and WBC), the IBF had stripped Calzaghe, and the belt was won by Lucien Bute. Politics alone stopped Calzaghe from acheiving "Undisputed". These alphabet orgs are way too crooked and money driven. Some promoters have them in their pocket.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by W1LL View Post
                      You can't really use "Undisputed" as the ultimate yardstick. If you look at Joe Calzaghe for example. He won the WBO title and unified it with Jeff Lacy's IBF, also picking up the vacant RING title. By the time Calzaghe fought Mikkel Kessler, who held the other two belts (WBA Super and WBC), the IBF had stripped Calzaghe, and the belt was won by Lucien Bute. Politics alone stopped Calzaghe from acheiving "Undisputed". These alphabet orgs are way too crooked and money driven. Some promoters have them in their pocket.
                      it wasnt politics, joe was hesitant to pick up losses from regular non-wbo title defences. Recall he went 8 years with the wbo even tohugh he knew it wasnt recognised at the time. The pattern is there, he never defended a non wbo title except against that scare he got from bika.

                      He only chased kessler because he knew mikkel was about to have hand surgery.
                      Not to take anything away from that win though, he did great against kessler! Excellent unification as you say, if a little brief.

                      Crawford is very different He hasnt waited for anyone to get injured for a decade. He just got on with it.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP