Who's the WBA middleweight champion, Golovkin or Jacobs?

[The Big Dunn]

you realize that you are trying to make a distinction based solely on what the wretched WBA calls its multiple titles.

Bottom line is BOTH GGG and Jacobs won vacant titles, while at the same time another WBA "champion" was seated above them. For GGG it was Sturm, and for Jacobs it was GGG.

But keep trying to tell yourself there is a difference.

No that isn't what happened.

Jacobs beat Fletcher in the ring in a title fight for a vacant belt. GGG was in the boardroom and got elevated from interim champ to regular champ. He never won a vacant belt, just an interim title.

There is a difference between a vacant belt and an interim title. You just pretend otherwise because GGG didn't win a vacant title.

[Eff Pandas]

Tracking title defenses in this era is some boxing nerds delight type **** now. It used to be a great way to establish yourself as the greatest fighter of your era (in one division or even multiple titles & defenses in more than one division). Even up til guys like Lennox & most of Floyd's & Manny's time in the ring it was still a rather notable thing, but not nearly as meaningful as when Joe Louis had his run or other great fighters made 8-10+ defenses.

In this era now its a bs stat cuz there is less quality control than ever in boxing history in maintaining the value of a title fight or hell titles themselves with interim or regular titles. Guys back in the day had to fight a top ten guy to defend their title. Guys today have to fight a top fifteen guy in one of four different top fifteen ranking groups that seldom contain the top guys since they tend to hold other titles.

That gives me an idea. You could probably come up with title inflation numbers over the years with how the quality of the belts & contenders have been devalued. Like a title defense in 2015 is worth 0.2 title defenses in 1955 lol.

[DreamerUSA]

A win in the ring is always more credible than being elevated to champion in a boardroom.

For all we know, GGG could've blown Mendoza and got elevated to champ as a result.

Well if we keep it real, Jacobs would'nt be "champ" now if GGG had'nt been elevated to Super. Also even if they had kept GGG as the regular champ, he would be Super now either way with his win over Lemieux. So if the timeline is how you want to try to **** on GGG, I guess. Bottom line is he earned the IBF title and has earned his WBA Super status.

I will however agree that the whole number of title defenses is a complete load of crap.

[OnePunch]

No that isn't what happened.

Jacobs beat Fletcher in the ring in a title fight for a vacant belt. GGG was in the boardroom and got elevated from interim champ to regular champ. He never won a vacant belt, just an interim title.

There is a difference between a vacant belt and an interim title. You just pretend otherwise because GGG didn't win a vacant title.

again, you are trying to validate the WBAs ridiculous multiple belts policy by giving the "regular" title some sort of additional credibility over the "interim" or "super" titles.

If the WBA were a credible organization, I would likely agree with you. But they are not. They should have just stripped Sturm and had GGG vs Nunez for the vacant regular title. But they didnt. They played games and let Sturm avoid GGG, and just moved Sturm up.

But of course in your mind that somehow diminishes GGGs position.....

[bigjavi973]

Sturm wasn't willing to face his mandatory Golovkin so he paid the WBA a nice sum of money and was declared the super champ:

//krikya360.com/oner-expl...olovkin--61851


In that case the WBA super champion Sturm was not the WBA middleweight champion. Golovkin on the other hand is super champ cause he also holds other major titles in the division so he is the real WBA middleweight champion.

Jacobs is just a belt holder.

by the end of 2009, GGG was ranked number 2 by the WBA in the mw rankings:

MIDDLEWEIGHT 160 Lbs / 72.58 Kgs
WBA WORLD CHAMPION FELIX STURM GER
Won Title 04-28-07
Last Mandatory 07-11-09
Last Defense 07-11-09

WBC KELLY PAVLIK
IBF SEBASTIAN SYLVESTER
WBO KELLY PAVLIK
TITLE BOXER ORGANIZATION COUNTRY
1 ANTHONY MUNDINE AUS
2 GENNADY GOLOVKIN OC KAZ



felix sturm was inactive at that point when WBA made him Super Champion....

//krikya360.com/felix-stu...-return--26650

and please oner is one salty ass dude:
//krikya360.com/felix-stu...r-money--38652

I guess since he said that sturm hired a hitman to kill him that must be true as well.

[OnePunch]

by the end of 2009, GGG was ranked number 2 by the WBA in the mw rankings:

MIDDLEWEIGHT 160 Lbs / 72.58 Kgs
WBA WORLD CHAMPION FELIX STURM GER
Won Title 04-28-07
Last Mandatory 07-11-09
Last Defense 07-11-09

WBC KELLY PAVLIK
IBF SEBASTIAN SYLVESTER
WBO KELLY PAVLIK
TITLE BOXER ORGANIZATION COUNTRY
1 ANTHONY MUNDINE AUS
2 GENNADY GOLOVKIN OC KAZ



felix sturm was inactive at that point when WBA made him Super Champion....

//krikya360.com/felix-stu...-return--26650

and please oner is one salty ass dude:
//krikya360.com/felix-stu...r-money--38652

I guess since he said that sturm hired a hitman to kill him that must be true as well.

some light reading for you......

[The Big Dunn]

again, you are trying to validate the WBAs ridiculous multiple belts policy by giving the "regular" title some sort of additional credibility over the "interim" or "super" titles.

If the WBA were a credible organization, I would likely agree with you. But they are not. They should have just stripped Sturm and had GGG vs Nunez for the vacant regular title. But they didnt. They played games and let Sturm avoid GGG, and just moved Sturm up.

But of course in your mind that somehow diminishes GGGs position.....

No I am not trying to validate anything. I am outright stating GGG didn't win his title in the ring. No more, no less.

I am doing this because its the truth and it pisses off GGG fans because its the truth.

they elevated GGG only to get more sanctioning fees. They shouldn't have elevated an interim champ to full champ just to get more in sanctioning fees.

[OnePunch]

No I am not trying to validate anything. I am outright stating GGG didn't win his title in the ring. No more, no less.

I am doing this because its the truth and it pisses off GGG fans because its the truth.

they elevated GGG only to get more sanctioning fees. They shouldn't have elevated an interim champ to full champ just to get more in sanctioning fees.

ok, let me try something here. Lets forget about which adjective the WBA uses to describe their specific titles. Throw the names super duper, regular, interim, platinum emeritus, etc out the window, and answer this simple question:

True or False: Both GGG and Jacobs each won a vacant version of a WBA title while another WBA champion was seated above them.

A simple true or false will do. (I bet you cant do it)

[bigjavi973]

some light reading for you......

Press Release / September 8, 2010 - 5:21pm

that's the date from your link.....


Updated at 12:00 AM EDT, Mon Apr 5, 2010

that's the date from my link.....


he was already made Super Champion by the date of the link I provided....

here's a quote from your link:
Gotzev maintains that if the WBA goes forward with this fight, the only reasonable route for Golovkin would be for them to order a fight between Sturm and Golovkin for super champion status.

Now how can they fight for super champion status if Sturm was already made the Super Champion?

Now remember a WBA Champion can be upgraded to Super Champion after he has 5 title defenses.

page 8 section C 2.-

Now should have there been a fight within 18 months of Sturm being elevated to Super Champion while he was in his court battle??? Yes 18 months after his fight they shoulda fought to unify the WBA Super & Reg titles.

But then around that time he went to fight with Geale for the IBF unification fight etc... which unification fights > mandatory fights no?

and that's when Geale got stripped for not fighting GGG and GGG was elevated to Super after 5 title defenses right before the Geale fight.

[bigjavi973]

ok, let me try something here. Lets forget about which adjective the WBA uses to describe their specific titles. Throw the names super duper, regular, interim, platinum emeritus, etc out the window, and answer this simple question:

True or False: Both GGG and Jacobs each won a vacant version of a WBA title while another WBA champion was seated above them.

A simple true or false will do. (I bet you cant do it)

Its not that hard.....

GGG won the interim title.....

Jacobs won the vacant WBA MW title.....


Does the WBA interim have more distinction than the WBA World "Reg" Title?




and yes all those super, interim, reg, interim interim.... they all suck... just have ONE champ per body.

also:

Fletcher > Nunez