Fury's retirements and the lineal championship

[IronDanHamza]

I don't disagree with your sentiment but it's difficult in practice to objectively gauge a consensus sometimes, so people tend to just declare whomever has the Ring and/or TBRB championship the lineal champion. Pacquiao is also widely beloved and people aren't generally going to challenge him when he makes a claim like that.

Pac was simply not dropped from his previous spot in the rankings for losing to Floyd, and Bradley was widely seen as the winner of the Chaves fight so he wasn't punished for that draw. The Vargas win was also valued (he was undefeated and ranked #7 by TBRB at the time). It's reasonable to disagree but that, in a nutshell, is why they were in the top 2 at the time.

Well, to me there lies the main issue with this. Because there's just no way Bradley was consensus #2 and as far as I'm aware it has to be a "consensus". I also think Pacquaio being beloved, which is true, being a reason toward crowning a new Lineage is also wrong.

I thought Bradley-Chavez draw was a fair result. Wasn't a robbery, at worst. So even if you include Vargas, who wasn't ranked via Ring, he still had 1 win over a ranked opponent in a 3 year period. That's not eligible for a vacant lineage under any logical standpoint when you have a list of top contenders in the same weight class.

AND especially when one of the two fighters competing for the new Lineage is coming off a loss, AND there are other "champions" at the same weight class!!!

It's just void of sense, there's like 3 or 4 gaping holes in it. I don't consider Pacquaio ever holding a Lineal Title at 147. I don't think anyone using logic could. And that's where the whole "lineage" thing get's tiresome, because it's not set in stone, it's widely ambiguous at best.

[kafkod]

In 2013, Mayweather and Guererro fought for the "vacant Lineage" at Welterweight.

Does that make sense to have that fight for the "vacant lineage"? Curious on people's opinions.

It makes sense as a marketing tool, I guess. A lot of boxing fans seem to believe that "the lineal" or "the lineage" is an actual title, and promoters take advantage of that to sell tickets.

[kafkod]

I'm sorry. That is a generic insult I use often when we have this debate.

I am sorry for not realizing that you wouldn't understand my hyperbole.

I shall in future refrain. I hope.

No worries! Like I said to JAB, it's just banter, no ill will intended.

[kafkod]

A very short history of the sanctioning bodies.

Anyone please help correct or extrapolate.

NYSAC (1920)
NBA/WBA (1921;1962)
WBC (1963)
IBF (1983)
WBO (1988)

Then it slipped into utter chaos.

Kafkod,

Who are the big four you mentioned above?

Some pointless history.

The NYSAC started declaring champions, although it seems they were never actually chartered to do so. After Frazier they stopped.

The NBA came into existence as a Midwestern reaction to NYSAC and a fear that New York would dominate the landscape.

The NBA became the WBA when it vacated its USA location (then Rhode Island) and reformed in Panama (eventually Puerto Rico) seeking a more international persona.

(I think) the WBC came into existence as a direct Mexican reaction to the WBA's Central/South American connections.

I don't know why the IBF came into existence except at the time there was no sanctioning body functioning out-of the USA. I believe its president (or chairman) was eventually imprisoned for taking bribes.

When the WBO first appeared I personaly remember it being considered a joke. Not so much now.

please correct if need be

The WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF are all paid sanctioning fees, they all recognise each others champions, and they are recognised by boxing and athletics commissions worldwide. Like it or not, pro boxing as we know it today revolves around those 4 organisations.

[kafkod]

They publish rankings on fighters and who they fight. If those fighters happened to have fought an ABC sanctioned fight it plays no part in how they rank. They are completely independent of promoters and sanctioning orgs. It really doesn't get better than that because they aren't looking to get paid, charge fighters or even deal with promoters. They're in it because of the love of the sport. I have had conversations and debates with several of their members, and when it comes to boxing, these guys are sharp and they know their history.

I get where you're coming from, I use to be there. I just don't agree with it the more I learn.

No hard feelings at all. If being asked "who's ***** are you" is the worst thing that happens to me today everything will be just fine. This has been a good conversation all things considered. While we don't agree, it hasn't really gotten nasty and I've read a lot of really good give and take.

[kafkod]

Stop trying to make linear sense of it. It is not there.

The lineal title is like "luck." It only really exists when the event is over, not before.

History denotes these (bogus if you like) lineal champions. They are the ones that will echo.

It's history that counts here. For better or worst.

"What is history, but lies agreed upon."

Exactly! That's the point I've been trying to make here. Since Ring Magazine retired their lineal title belt, the lineage has been about history, not about "lineal title fights"

[Willie Pep 229]

Exactly! That's the point I've been trying to make here. Since Ring Magazine retired their lineal title belt, the lineage has been about history, not about "lineal title fights"

We could have saved eachother a lot of time with better communication. Or maybe we both needed to use eachother's arguments to arrive at a consensus. LOL

[Willie Pep 229]

The WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF are all paid sanctioning fees, they all recognise each others champions, and they are recognised by boxing and athletics commissions worldwide. Like it or not, pro boxing as we know it today revolves around those 4 organisations.

Those are the four I expected.

What do you think about the rise of the IBO?

Came into existence with Pinkerton Thomas in 1992 but really made its bones with W. Klitschko defenses in the 2010s and AJ in the 20-teens.

Will it gain the stature to make it one of 'the five'?

[kafkod]

Those are the four I expected.

What do you think about the rise of the IBO?

Came into existence with Pinkerton Thomas in 1992 but really made its bones with W. Klitschko defenses in the 2010s and AJ in the 20-teens.

Will it gain the stature to make it one of 'the five'?

The situation with the IBO baffles me. They've been around at least as long as the WBO, and some of the biggest names in boxing have held, and still hold, IBO belts. Usyk and Bivol are both IBO champions.Usyk won his IBO belt from AJ and he was also the IBO champ at CW. Yet they are still unrecognised by the other 4 sanctioning bodies. They all recognise each other, but not the IBO. I've no idea why that is.

The IBO don't order mandos, but they do charge sanctioning fees. I just checked their website, and their fees are no joke - for fights with purses over $2million, and all HW title fights, $25,000 from the promoter and 3% of the purse from the fighter. The promoter also has to pay $5000 annually while his fighter holds the title.

So Usyk and his promoter must have paid the IBO a fortune in fees over the years! Unless maybe they made some kind of deal with them and got a discount on the fees?

World title belts = $$$, I guess, even "unrecognised" belts.

[QueensburyRules]

In 2013, Mayweather and Guererro fought for the "vacant Lineage" at Welterweight.

Does that make sense to have that fight for the "vacant lineage"? Curious on people's opinions.

- - That was a hambone l'l floydy/he cr ac k daddy fight vs Guerrero/he daddy Ruben.

l'l floydy promise toe to toe and Ruben promise to c ra ck up c rac k daddy.

l'l floydy ran like a thief in the night and he c rac k daddy was shamed.

Lineal is what lower orders pull out their c ra cks when they get desperate...