Wlad–Chagaev & the lineal HW title

[QueensburyRules]

--- How on Gods green earth can the ABCs establish a lock on the title when there are 5 of them and a half dozen WTF titles in play?

Being in dispute is the very nature of human mongrelized heritage, and you can bet the farm and bank on it!

There has been precious few consensus lineal champs. When Joe Louis beat the BBbc champ Savold who also held the white title, Louis earned more titles in that one fight than Lar ever did, not to mention his previous long lineal title reign.

[HOUDINI563]

Louis best Braddock for his one and only worlds hwt championship. The true hwt championship became convoluted when Ali retired after beating Spinks. However it’s quite clear, although one needs to put together the pieces of the puzzle that Holmes was the rightful next true worlds hwt champion. The title from that point to Lewis retirement again is fairly straightforward. Since that time however the situation falls apart. There is no clear true worlds hwt champion from that point to this very day.

[Marchegiano]

May I ask y'all, at what point did the lineal title stop adhering to the old traditions?

For example an easy one is champion's prerogative. Back in the day the Champ claimed who was number one contender. That of course went away with bodies. You do not have any lineals during the era when the title would be called lineal as opposed to simply champion naming their contender.

billeau2 has got me thinking on it. The lineal does not have to fight a champion to lose their lineal status. If they lose to someone who is not even on the sanctioning bodies world ranks that person becomes the lineal champion. Does that in turn make those who tried and failed, like Pianeta or Sefari, automatically number one contenders to the lineal title? Can we consider that champion's prerogative?

For me, I always just look at lineal as the olden title. I go by the old traditions. From my understanding, the bodies split up the belts and by the 70s(?) the public was just hungry for one face so they demanded a return to the old ways lead by Fleischer who was a big fan of bare knuckle. So to me, Sullivan's belt is Sullivan's belt. You can't win that **** by committee. The Fancy done tried and the Champ done smacked that down. Look at Peter Maher and ****.

I don't argue with Wlad as lineal myself because the biggest most important rule of lineal still applies. Lineal, whether you mean the present idea inspired in the 20th century or you mean the olden traditions handed down from Figg and the sort, has always been a popularity contest first. If the populace says you can break lineal rules you get to. Broughton Taylor is a good look into for that sort of firsts.

So I'm not sure about Wlad being lineal but given so many folks are I don't hardly put no thought to it and just accept what I've been told. I am more interested in pinning down the differences in lineal now with lineal from at least the Sullivan era if not prior.

[QueensburyRules]

--- Nah, only Hoo Dats hysteria falling apart.

Wlad clearly the only 2nd coming of Louis in boxing history was defacto Lineal champ that had fallen into the disrepair of the loon bin of experts.

The Ring title had trumped the idiocy of Lineal loons due to the Ring carrying on an organized tradition dating back to Nat Fleischer starting what became known as the bible of boxing. Nat's presence was so overwhelming that he dictated the outcome of the Ali/Liston II travesty.

Lineal Loons: read it and weep the for the good ol' days when Loons were Men and not headless hens running about squawkless with great fury before collapsing in a heap on the dinner table.

Skewered and roasted of course. It's what's for dinner!

[Marchegiano]

--- Nah, only Hoo Dats hysteria falling apart.

Wlad clearly the only 2nd coming of Louis in boxing history was defacto Lineal champ that had fallen into the disrepair of the loon bin of experts.

The Ring title had trumped the idiocy of Lineal loons due to the Ring carrying on an organized tradition dating back to Nat Fleischer starting what became known as the bible of boxing. Nat's presence was so overwhelming that he dictated the outcome of the Ali/Liston II travesty.

Lineal Loons: read it and weep the for the good ol' days when Loons were Men and not headless hens running about squawkless with great fury before collapsing in a heap on the dinner table.

Skewered and roasted of course. It's what's for dinner!

I don't understand your point. Dumb it down for this dumbass.

[QueensburyRules]

--- The Ring title has replaced the Lineal title.

What, 8 words encapsulated for easy understanding...

[DreamFighter]

Chageav didnt have the lineal, nor was the new lineage a genuine one from the top fighters.

Its a good example of the flexible weight that the lineal carries, it can be as weak as an IBO title.

[HOUDINI563]

The only time a retiring hwt champion dictated who should fight for the vacated title was Jeffries who called for Hart and Root to fight for the true championship. A case can be made that these two were indeed 1 and 2 at that time.

Fleischer was not a proponent of bare knuckle hwt champions. He did not rate Sullivan in his top ten nor any of his predecessors. Nat did feel the “old timers” were superior overall. He pointed to their toughness (as they mostly toiled in labor intensive jobs prior to boxing) as well as their emphasis on the “finer points of the game (feinting, blocking, slipping, countering etc).

[QueensburyRules]

The only time a retiring hwt champion dictated who should fight for the vacated title was Jeffries who called for Hart and Root to fight for the true championship. A case can be made that these two were indeed 1 and 2 at that time.

--- Indeedy, Moe and Larry would make you Curly...#LinealLoonboxing

[crold1]

Help me out here. Looking back on this fight from June 2009, I have to question what warranted the vacant lineal HW title (not The Ring title) to be at stake.

Wladimir was obviously consensus #1, but surely Vitali was #2? So whether he would've fought Haye as scheduled, or Chagaev as he did, how could the lineal title have been on the line when those two were #3 and #4 at best?

Or, am I getting my rankings wrong – was Vitali not considered #2 due him having only recently returned? Also, we had that ridiculous WBA situation where Chagaev and Valuev were co-champions right up until Chagaev was stripped before the fight. Was Chagev therefore #2 after all, based on recent resume?

Considering all that, I believe the previous HW lineage should've started from Wladimir–Haye in 2011 instead. Unless, again, Vitali was #2 by this point.

Wlad was 1, Chag 3 in Ring and everywhere else really. Wlad beat everyone but his brother by that point so some went from there (me included) in part because the brothers weren't going to fight and Wlad was doing more to beat all the other top contenders. When Wlad beat Povetkin, Vitali was retired. That was the first 100% 1-2 fight he won and if it's not Chagaev, then one can start the line there.