Is Terrance Crawford the Lineal ww champ?

[pillowfists98]

**** NO! Manny was never lineal at welterweight. Only ******s claim he was.

Him and Bradley were #1 and #2 at WW after Floyd retired.

[Phenom]

Manny was never the lineal champ at 147 period

[dibzvincent143]

They said Manny was lineal when he beat Bradley, he said he retied but fought 7 months later beating Vargas, then lost to Horn and Crawford beat Horn..So isnt Crawford now the lineal champ?

Floyd was the last lineal of 154 and 147.

Pacquiao was the last lineal of 130, 126

[pillowfists98]

Manny was never the lineal champ at 147 period

I mean thats your opinion though. Every list that i've seen has Pacquiao as a lineal champion at WW. The Cyber Boxing zone has the most definitive list and Tbrb had Pacquiao and Bradley #1 and #2 at WW just before they fought.
http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/welter.htm
http://www.tbrb.org/2016/03/15/8-march-2016/

[Fists_of_Fury]

Him and Bradley were #1 and #2 at WW after Floyd retired. That was according to Ring Magazine I guess.

Pacquiao and Bradley were not the consensus #1 and #2 welterweights idc what Ring supposedly had them ranked as. People can make up whatever **** rankings they want hence the need to be consensus top dogs to be lineal.

[pillowfists98]

Pacquiao and Bradley were not the consensus #1 and #2 welterweights idc what Ring supposedly had them ranked as. People can make up whatever **** rankings they want hence the need to be consensus top dogs to be lineal.

Doesn't have to be consensus, its just who is determined to be #1 and #2 by the specific authorities . You don't have to regard the lineal champion as important for that reason but Pacquiao was definitely lineal champion at 147 that is a fact.

[IronDanHamza]

No because Pacquaio wasn't Lineal Champion at 147.

[IronDanHamza]

Doesn't have to be consensus, its just who is determined to be #1 and #2 by the specific authorities . You don't have to regard the lineal champion as important for that reason but Pacquiao was definitely lineal champion at 147 that is a fact.

It does have to be consensus #1 and #2

He wasn't Lineal.Champion and if's definitely not a fact that he was.

[pillowfists98]

It does have to be consensus #1 and #2

He wasn't Lineal.Champion and if's definitely not a fact that he was.

Lineal champion isn't an opinion. Every single authority that keeps track of lineal champions has Pacquiao as lineal by beating Bradley the 3rd time. You may not agree with it but it is a fact.

[_Rexy_]

I'm not an expert so I did search it.

To be Lineal Champ (post-Ring listing), a boxer should either:

1) BE THE MAN IN THE DIVISION - which I understand as unifying the belts

ex. Vlad after Lewis retired became Lineal Champ eventhough he didnt fight Lewis

2) BEAT THE MAN IN THE DIVISION - self explanatory.

ex. Fury beat Vlad, therefore is considered the lineal champ

But here's where it becomes unclear to me. Does lineal championship carry over to winner, over and over....

ex. if Wilder beats Fury, will be the lineal champ?

MY OPINION: I dont think that is the case unless Wilder unifies and solidifies his position as No. 1 in HW. It is only passes over to a winner once, i.e. if the current lineal champ is beaten, the title goes to the winner.

Lineal champion doesn't necessarily mean No. 1 in the HW division though, regardless of your opinion. Case and point, the lineage in the 90's went from Holyfield to Moorer to Foreman to Briggs, and then to Lewis. Of those 5 lineal champions from 1993-2001 only two of them were every No.1 in the division. (Briggs didn't even have any titles, as Foreman was stripped. Foreman and Briggs ONLY held the Lineal championship and nothing else. No Ring belt either)