Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Is Linear Championship as prestigious as the alphabets?
-I cant edit the title :(
Cassamayor is the linear lightweight champion but Nate Campbel after conqering Juan Diaz has the Belts.
So do you think that the Linear Championships is as Prestigious as the WBC, WBA and IBF?
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Absolutly the Linear/The Ring championship has more importance. Joel Cassamayor beat Diego Corralas to become champion, and he will be champion until someone beats him.
However, Cassamayor is a horrible poster child for the THe Ring because he has been extremely inactive, his last fight was a horrible gift decision, and while this was going on, Juan Diaz went around and collected all the alphabet trinkets.
A good example would be Kelly Pavlik. He beat the man who beat the man.....If he is ever stripped of his alphabet titles, the public will still recognize him as THE Middleweight Champion of the World.
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
Is Linear Championship as prestigious as the alphabets?
-I cant edit the title :(
Cassamayor is the linear lightweight champion but Nate Campbel after conqering Juan Diaz has the Belts.
So do you think that the Linear Championships is as Prestigious as the WBC, WBA and IBF?
Of course it is LENNOX LEWIS is still the Linear heavyweight champ.
Because From when Patterson beat Moore the true champ is the man who beat the man.
The reason LENNOX LEWIS boxed Shannon Briggs was not because Briggs held the WBU title. It was because by beating Foreman Briggs was the linear champ.
And no matter how little anyone rates Briggs in the history of boxing for a very short time he held the legitimate heavyweight championship of the world.
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SEANIE
Of course it is LENNOX LEWIS is still the Linear heavyweight champ.
Because From when Patterson beat Moore the true champ is the man who beat the man.
The reason LENNOX LEWIS boxed Shannon Briggs was not because Briggs held the WBU title. It was because by beating Foreman Briggs was the linear champ.
And no matter how little anyone rates Briggs in the history of boxing for a very short time he held the legitimate heavyweight championship of the world.
The problem is Seanie he didn't beat Foreman, Foreman was robbed and Foreman was what 47 year's old ??
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Well when it comes to the Lineal Title you have to go to the old motto that sais the title does not make the champion but the champion makes the title.
The best example of this is when Roy Jones ruled the 175lb division he was never the linear champion. But he was without a doubt THE MAN at that division.
So the answer is: It depends on who is the linear champion.
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Rookie Fan
Well when it comes to the Lineal Title you have to go to the old motto that sais the title does not make the champion but the champion makes the title.
The best example of this is when Roy Jones ruled the 175lb division he was never the linear champion. But he was without a doubt THE MAN at that division.
So the answer is: It depends on who is the linear champion.
What a crock of dogs pooh.
Jones inherited Michazelski titles.
He was scared to box outside America.
Michazelski has more claim to being the linear champ than Jones ever had.
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
The problem is Seanie he didn't beat Foreman, Foreman was robbed and Foreman was what 47 year's old ??
The record books says Briggs won and so did the judges.
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SEANIE
What a crock of dogs pooh.
Jones inherited Michazelski titles.
He was scared to box outside America.
Michazelski has more claim to being the linear champ than Jones ever had.
Hmmmm
Are you sure?
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SEANIE
What a crock of dogs pooh.
Jones inherited Michazelski titles.
He was scared to box outside America.
Michazelski has more claim to being the linear champ than Jones ever had.
Explain to me which part of my post is a crock of dogs pooh....
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Rookie Fan
Explain to me which part of my post is a crock of dogs pooh....
Jones won titles Michazkeski was forced to give up.
He refused to box Michazlski cos he was scared.
You saying Jones deserves to be liner champ is a massive crock of dogs pooh.
He doesnt deserve it.
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SEANIE
The record books says Briggs won and so did the judges.
Yea and the record books say Spinks beat Holmes in there 2nd fight but there isn't a single boxing fan i've ever met who thinks Spinks deserved that decision. If you honestly think Briggs was a legit Linear champion then you are dreaming. Foreman was 47 years old for crying out loud and it was a damn right highway robbery, there was even an investigation because it was such a bad decision.
And as for Jones vs Dariusz statement get real, Jones record at LHW was much better than Dariusz's. Plus lets not forget Jones offered Dariusz a fight in USA and Dariusz denied it. But Jones didn't want to go to Germany so it works both ways. And lets not forget Dariusz struggled with the likes of Richard Hall who Jones toyed with. And plus lets not forget Julio Cesar Gonzalez gave Dariusz his first loss and totally out boxed him. Another fighter Jones toyed with and floored Gonzalez 3 times.
Jones best Wins at LHW
Montel Griffin
Mike McCallum
Virgil Hill
Julio Cesar Gonzalez
Eric Harding
Reggie Johnson
Clinton Woods
Dariusz's best Wins at LHW
Virgil Hill
Montel Griffin
Graciano Rocchigiani x2
Who's record looks better now ??
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SEANIE
Jones won titles Michazkeski was forced to give up.
He refused to box Michazlski cos he was scared.
You saying Jones deserves to be liner champ is a massive crock of dogs pooh.
He doesnt deserve it.
Ummm... NO I never said that. I said that he was not the Linear Champion. IMO he should not be considered the linear champion because he never beat Darious who was deservatly so, the the linear champion.
All I'm saying is that in that case the belts held more weight than the linear title. I respect Darious but I think it is safe to say that Jones was the #1 175lber of his time.
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SEANIE
What a crock of dogs pooh.
Jones inherited Michazelski titles.
He was scared to box outside America.
Michazelski has more claim to being the linear champ than Jones ever had.
Incorrect
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
The Ring Magazine belts are the ONLY ones that matter.
I couldn't even tell you who owns the WBC, WBA, IBF in any of the divisions, because they're completely worthless.
Re: Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?
Ricky Hatton may not hold any major title but he is considered the true champion at light welterweight.