Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
1.) When Bernard fought Tarver and won,he didNOT become the lineal champion?
2.) is the lineal champion the same as the RING mag 1 champ per division?If not,which is the more respectable.
1) he did not become the linear champ.
2) I beleive the Ring stopped doing champions for a while and re-instated it around 2002 (I'm not 100% sure as I didn't read it then). It would appear they started the division with who was top dog at the time. Roy Jones was a more famous American with more belts. You don't become linear champ just by uniting x amount of belts, you have to beat the previous champion, if there was one. Joel Casamor is still linear lightweight champion, even though he holds no official belt and Juan Diaz has 3. According to one poster everyone should just forget he was champion now someone else has more paper titles, but it doesn't work like that. To be the man you have to beat the man.
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
IMO Erdei is not the linear champ! Dariusz only unified two portions of the title & then planned to move to cruiser (which is about the time he was stripped, he later changed his mind). It was considered that to be the undisputed champion you have to unify all 3 belts just like Pernell Whitaker did at 135.
Not the ole' Dariusz stripping titles again what they did to him was wrong theres no other way about it.
I totally agree that he was stripped unfairly, he had to defend in 30 days for one organisation & the other stripped him cause he showed their belt with his original one. That's just another reason why I don't pay much attention to the alphabet idiots.
But my point is still Michalczewski only unified two thirds, whilst Jones unified all 3 making him the undisputed champion & following that line Hopkins is now the linear champ!
Being Undisputed Champion does not equal being Lineal Champion... Like has been said before, you don't even need to have a title to be Lineal Champion.
Is it Lineal or is it Linear... I am so confused... :-\
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
Roy JOnes and Virgill didn't even really fight at light heavyweight, both weighed over the limit. Anyways Roy won his belts against Montell Griffin, Lou Del Valle, and Reggie Johnson, Darius wouldn't come over to fight Roy so Roy was the lineal champ and he had the WBC, WBA and IBF belts.
If Darius was Linear champ maybe Roy should've gone over to fight him ;)
Yep Jones should of gone over to Germany and win 10 out of the 12 rounds. But to the disbelief of us boxing fans and Roy Jones Jr still lose a decision ;)
Nah it would've been better for Darius to go over to Vegas where he would definitely get a totally fair decision in the squeeky clean US
Well thats it you just answered your own question, both men didn't want to leave home because they know they wouldn't get fair scoring with the judges. Like i said both men were making enough money where they were, and they didn't need to leave home.
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larryboy
Quote:
1.) When Bernard fought Tarver and won,he didNOT become the lineal champion?
2.) is the lineal champion the same as the RING mag 1 champ per division?If not,which is the more respectable.
1) he did not become the linear champ.
2) I beleive the Ring stopped doing champions for a while and re-instated it around 2002 (I'm not 100% sure as I didn't read it then). It would appear they started the division with who was top dog at the time. Roy Jones was a more famous American with more belts. You don't become linear champ just by uniting x amount of belts, you have to beat the previous champion, i
f there was one. Joel Casamor is still linear lightweight champion, even though he holds no official belt and Juan Diaz has 3. According to one poster everyone should just forget he was champion now someone else has more paper titles, but it doesn't work like that. To be the man you have to beat the man.
When Spinks moved to heavy the title became vacant, many fighters held portions of the title & Michalczewski managed to win 2 parts. But winning two parts does not constitute to becoming the linear champ!
The Ring installed their championship in the April 2002 issue, Lewis who had unified all three parts was recognized as champion, Jones Jr had also unified all three parts & was recognized as LH champ, Hopkins had done the same as had Kostya Tszyu. All 4 champions had either beaten the reigning recognized champion or unified all the belts. Just as Holyfield had done at cruiser & Whitaker at 135.
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
IMO Erdei is not the linear champ! Dariusz only unified two portions of the title & then planned to move to cruiser (which is about the time he was stripped, he later changed his mind). It was considered that to be the undisputed champion you have to unify all 3 belts just like Pernell Whitaker did at 135.
Not the ole' Dariusz stripping titles again what they did to him was wrong theres no other way about it.
I totally agree that he was stripped unfairly, he had to defend in 30 days for one organisation & the other stripped him cause he showed their belt with his original one. That's just another reason why I don't pay much attention to the alphabet idiots.
But my point is still Michalczewski only unified two thirds, whilst Jones unified all 3 making him the undisputed champion & following that line Hopkins is now the linear champ!
Being Undisputed Champion does not equal being Lineal Champion... Like has been said before, you don't even need to have a title to be Lineal Champion.
Is it Lineal or is it Linear... I am so confused... :-\
I agree you don't need a title to be the real champ, I don't even recognize any of the alphabet groups, but at the time if the championship is vacant which it was when Spinks left for the heavyweight ranks then by unifying all 3 belts you became recognized as champion of the division. Dariusz only unified 2 parts, Jones got all 3. You can say what you want about the stripping but that is the way it happened.
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
I agree you don't need a title to be the real champ, I don't even recognize any of the alphabet groups, but at the time if the championship is vacant which it was when Spinks left for the heavyweight ranks then by unifying all 3 belts you became recognized as champion of the division. Dariusz only unified 2 parts, Jones got all 3. You can say what you want about the stripping but that is the way it happened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
IMO Erdei is not the linear champ! Dariusz only unified two portions of the title & then planned to move to cruiser (which is about the time he was stripped, he later changed his mind). It was considered that to be the undisputed champion you have to unify all 3 belts just like Pernell Whitaker did at 135.
Not the ole' Dariusz stripping titles again what they did to him was wrong theres no other way about it.
I totally agree that he was stripped unfairly, he had to defend in 30 days for one organisation & the other stripped him cause he showed their belt with his original one. That's just another reason why I don't pay much attention to the alphabet idiots.
But my point is still Michalczewski only unified two thirds, whilst Jones unified all 3 making him the undisputed champion & following that line Hopkins is now the linear champ!
Being Undisputed Champion does not equal being Lineal Champion... Like has been said before, you don't even need to have a title to be Lineal Champion.
Is it Lineal or is it Linear... I am so confused... :-\
I agree you don't need a title to be the real champ, I don't even recognize any of the alphabet groups, but at the time if the championship is vacant which it was when Spinks left for the heavyweight ranks then by unifying all 3 belts you became recognized as champion of the division. Dariusz only unified 2 parts, Jones got all 3. You can say what you want about the stripping but that is the way it happened.
Galaxy then you should also note that what you are saying is according to you and not the way it is.
Because the way it is, is different. You consider Jones the Lineal champ because he unified 3 belts and that's fine since it's according to you but the truth is different from that.
Hill became Lineal after beating Maske, Dariusz beat Hill, Julio beat Dariusz and Erdei beat Julio.
That's the way it is now wether you agree with it or not is a whole nother story.
Take for example the Lighweight division there hasn't been a Lineal champ since Pernell Whittaker.
Why?
Diaz has captured WBA, WBC & IBF titles yet Casamayor is the Ring Champ but no Lineal champ in that Div.
It's not about titles or the Ring belt it's more of who beats whom and if the titles are vacated once a fighter faces the best in this case I'm assuming the Lineal champ would be determined IF and when Diaz fights Casamayor.
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
I agree you don't need a title to be the real champ, I don't even recognize any of the alphabet groups, but at the time if the championship is vacant which it was when Spinks left for the heavyweight ranks then by unifying all 3 belts you became recognized as champion of the division. Dariusz only unified 2 parts, Jones got all 3. You can say what you want about the stripping but that is the way it happened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
IMO Erdei is not the linear champ! Dariusz only unified two portions of the title & then planned to move to cruiser (which is about the time he was stripped, he later changed his mind). It was considered that to be the undisputed champion you have to unify all 3 belts just like Pernell Whitaker did at 135.
Not the ole' Dariusz stripping titles again what they did to him was wrong theres no other way about it.
I totally agree that he was stripped unfairly, he had to defend in 30 days for one organisation & the other stripped him cause he showed their belt with his original one. That's just another reason why I don't pay much attention to the alphabet idiots.
But my point is still Michalczewski only unified two thirds, whilst Jones unified all 3 making him the undisputed champion & following that line Hopkins is now the linear champ!
Being Undisputed Champion does not equal being Lineal Champion... Like has been said before, you don't even need to have a title to be Lineal Champion.
Is it Lineal or is it Linear... I am so confused... :-\
I agree you don't need a title to be the real champ, I don't even recognize any of the alphabet groups, but at the time if the championship is vacant which it was when Spinks left for the heavyweight ranks then by unifying all 3 belts you became recognized as champion of the division. Dariusz only unified 2 parts, Jones got all 3. You can say what you want about the stripping but that is the way it happened.
Galaxy then you should also note that what you are saying is according to you and not the way it is.
Because the way it is, is different. You consider Jones the Lineal champ because he unified 3 belts and that's fine since it's according to you but the truth is different from that.
Hill became Lineal after beating Maske, Dariusz beat Hill, Julio beat Dariusz and Erdei beat Julio.
That's the way it is now wether you agree with it or not is a whole nother story.
Take for example the Lighweight division there hasn't been a Lineal champ since Pernell Whittaker.
Why?
Diaz has captured WBA, WBC & IBF titles yet Casamayor is the Ring Champ but no Lineal champ in that Div.
It's not about titles or the Ring belt it's more of who beats whom and
if the titles are vacated once a fighter faces the best in this case I'm assuming the Lineal champ would be determined IF and when Diaz fights Casamayor.
Sorry Mick but can you tell why you think Hill/ Maske was for the linear title? Cause it don't qualify in my books. When Spinks left the championship was vacant.
What your saying there is once a fighter faces the best but Jones was there at the time to so how can the Hill/ Maske fight be for the linear title?
You use Whitaker but that is exactly my point he became recognized champion after unifying all three belts, just like Holyfield did!
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Sorry Mick but can you tell why you think Hill/ Maske was for the linear title?
When a Lineal champion vacates/retires I belive that 2 fighters are determined to be the best.
If they happen to fight then then winner could be called the Lineal champ.
For example Diaz & Casamayor are the best in their div. if they happen to fight the winner would be the Lineal champ.
When Dariusz & Hill fought they were both considered to be the best in their division because A) Hill beat Maske.
Maske himself had been an established LHW since 1993 they fought in 1996. Hill himself had been and established LHW since 1987 (thats 87 not 97) when they in 1996. B) Dariusz had been an established LHW since 1994 he fought Hill in 1997.
When the fight was being made let's say RJJ was just moving into the LHW div. so how can he be considered top LHW was he was just coming in. Not ONLY that BUT he also ran into a little bump named Griffin.
And that my good man is why Hill vs Dariusz was for the Lineal title because while RJJ was esablishing himself the other 2 were already la creme de la creme.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
What your saying there is once a fighter faces the best but Jones was there at the time to so how can the Hill/ Maske fight be for the linear title?
The Lineal title was vacant sooooo.
When Hill and Maske was made it was decided that they were 2 of the best the fight was made in 1996 RJJ in 1996 had just gotten his feet wet with McCallum why would he be considered the best in the Div. when Hill & Maske had been champions for years?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
You use Whitaker but that is exactly my point he became recognized champion after unifying all three belts, just like Holyfield did!
Unifying the titles IS not a requirement although it will help as recognizing you as the best. Diaz has WBA/IBF/WBO I bet you if he were to beat Diaz for the WBC he still wouldn't become Lineal? Guess why?
Cause Casamayor is considered #1 in the Lighweight div. so Diaz would have to beat Casamayor to be considered Lineal.
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Sorry Mick but can you tell why you think Hill/ Maske was for the linear title?
When a Lineal champion vacates/retires I belive that 2 fighters are determined to be the best.
If they happen to fight then then winner could be called the Lineal champ.
For example Diaz & Casamayor are the best in their div. if they happen to fight the winner would be the Lineal champ.
When Dariusz & Hill fought they were both considered to be the best in their division because A) Hill beat Maske.
Maske himself had been an established LHW since 1993 they fought in 1996. Hill himself had been and established LHW since 1987 (thats 87 not 97) when they in 1996. B) Dariusz had been an established LHW since 1994 he fought Hill in 1997.
When the fight was being made let's say RJJ was just moving into the LHW div. so how can he be considered top LHW was he was just coming in. Not ONLY that BUT he also ran into a little bump named Griffin.
And that my good man is why Hill vs Dariusz was for the Lineal title because while RJJ was esablishing himself the other 2 were already la creme de la creme.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
What your saying there is once a fighter faces the best but Jones was there at the time to so how can the Hill/ Maske fight be for the linear title?
The Lineal title was vacant sooooo.
When Hill and Maske was made it was decided that they were 2 of the best the fight was made in 1996 RJJ in 1996 had just gotten his feet wet with McCallum why would he be considered the best in the Div. when Hill & Maske had been champions for years?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
You use Whitaker but that is exactly my point he became recognized champion after unifying all three belts, just like Holyfield did!
Unifying the titles IS not a requirement although it will help as recognizing you as the best. Diaz has WBA/IBF/WBO I bet you if he were to beat Diaz for the WBC he still wouldn't become Lineal? Guess why?
Cause Casamayor is considered #1 in the Lighweight div. so Diaz would have to beat Casamayor to be considered Lineal.
When Mayweather moved from 130 to 135 the ring ranked him second only behind Castillo, now Jones fought at LH the day before Hill & Maske so he was in the division so the same could have occurred. Jones was rated one of the best fighters in the world P4P at the time so there is doubt that Maske & Hill were the two best in the division.
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
All you need to do is look at Jones opposition to Dariusz's opposition at Light Heavyweight and look at common opposition. Dariusz went 12 hard rounds with Virgil Hill, Jones destroyed Hill in 4. Dariusz was also struggling with the likes of Richard Hall who Jones toyed with and made him look like he should of been in a different sport. Gonzalez also pretty much easily beat Dariusz on points despite the bogus scorecards. When Gonzalez fought Jones he was dominated and was dropped multiple times.
Jones Best Wins At Light Heavyweight
Virgil Hill
Montel Griffin
Reggie Johnson
Lou Del Valle
Mike McCallum
Eric Harding
Julio Cesar Gonzalez
Clinton Woods
Antonio Tarver
Dariusz Michalczewski's Best Wins At Light Heavyweight
Virgil Hill
Graciano Rocchigiani x2
Montell Griffin
Richard Hall x2
I don't know about you but i know who i would have considered the real champion at 175.
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
When Mayweather moved from 130 to 135 the ring ranked him second only behind Castillo, now Jones fought at LH the day before Hill & Maske so he was in the division so the same could have occurred.
So within 1 day they were to change things around because Jones came into the division?
The fight had been in the talks for years as Hill & Maske were 1 and 2 for years.
Damn! Galaxy you really are testing my brain here... I kinda got a headache now trying to think and I'm pulling Magazines and books out like crazy here... :D
That I remember the talks of the fight got more serious late 1994 and I'm reading here that 1995 Haske was moved to #1 after beating Iran & Graciano 2 times in 1994-95 thus dropping Hill to #2 after Hill had been #1 for the 2 previous years.
So you see leading to the fight months/years prior to the fight it was decided that they were both the best long before RJJ came so he comes in a day before fight night and you think that all the build up and all the years they spent as #1 and #2 have to change?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Jones was rated one of the best fighters in the world P4P at the time so there is doubt that Maske & Hill were the two best in the division.
1 day is not enough to change what had tooken years to build. I see what your saying but rittle me this what about if RJJ would have fought that same day and won also then what? Is it also justified that he was P4P in the world and had fought there already?
Now if RJJ would have fought I'm sure months even a year earlier then I would not disagree with you but the way in which it happened it was just not to be for RJJ.
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
When Mayweather moved from 130 to 135 the ring ranked him second only behind Castillo, now Jones fought at LH the day before Hill & Maske so he was in the division so the same could have occurred.
So within 1 day they were to change things around because Jones came into the division?
The fight had been in the talks for years as Hill & Maske were 1 and 2 for years.
Damn! Galaxy you really are testing my brain here... I kinda got a headache now trying to think and I'm pulling Magazines and books out like crazy here... :D
That I remember the talks of the fight got more serious late 1994 and I'm reading here that 1995 Haske was moved to #1 after beating Iran & Graciano 2 times in 1994-95 thus dropping Hill to #2 after Hill had been #1 for the 2 previous years.
So you see leading to the fight months/years prior to the fight it was decided that they were both the best long before RJJ came so he comes in a day before fight night and you think that all the build up and all the years they spent as #1 and #2 have to change?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Jones was rated one of the best fighters in the world P4P at the time so there is doubt that Maske & Hill were the two best in the division.
1 day is not enough to change what had tooken years to build. I see what your saying but rittle me this what about if RJJ would have fought that same day and won also then what? Is it also justified that he was P4P in the world and had fought there already?
Now if RJJ would have fought I'm sure months even a year earlier then I would not disagree with you but the way in which it happened it was just not to be for RJJ.
cc to you Mick I've enjoyed the debate. All I'm saying is that because Jones was in the division & was the best fighter in the world at the time he would have been favored to beat either guy IMO. So by that theory Hill/ Maske were not the two best fighters in the division at the time of the fight. So it did not quailfy as a linear fight. IMO the championship stayed vacant until Jones unified all 3 belts just like Holyfield & Whitaker had done!
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Galaxy and Mike,you guys are awesome man! Even though I have to read through your posts like 25times to understand it,great stuff you boxing historian buffs! :laugh: :laugh:
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
When Mayweather moved from 130 to 135 the ring ranked him second only behind Castillo, now Jones fought at LH the day before Hill & Maske so he was in the division so the same could have occurred.
So within 1 day they were to change things around because Jones came into the division?
The fight had been in the talks for years as Hill & Maske were 1 and 2 for years.
Damn! Galaxy you really are testing my brain here... I kinda got a headache now trying to think and I'm pulling Magazines and books out like crazy here... :D
That I remember the talks of the fight got more serious late 1994 and I'm reading here that 1995 Haske was moved to #1 after beating Iran & Graciano 2 times in 1994-95 thus dropping Hill to #2 after Hill had been #1 for the 2 previous years.
So you see leading to the fight months/years prior to the fight it was decided that they were both the best long before RJJ came so he comes in a day before fight night and you think that all the build up and all the years they spent as #1 and #2 have to change?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy.
Jones was rated one of the best fighters in the world P4P at the time so there is doubt that Maske & Hill were the two best in the division.
1 day is not enough to change what had tooken years to build. I see what your saying but rittle me this what about if RJJ would have fought that same day and won also then what? Is it also justified that he was P4P in the world and had fought there already?
Now if RJJ would have fought I'm sure months even a year earlier then I would not disagree with you but the way in which it happened it was just not to be for RJJ.
cc to you Mick I've enjoyed the debate. All I'm saying is that because Jones was in the division & was the best fighter in the world at the time he would have been favored to beat either guy IMO. So by that theory Hill/ Maske were not the two best fighters in the division at the time of the fight. So it did not quailfy as a linear fight. IMO the championship stayed vacant until Jones unified all 3 belts just like Holyfield & Whitaker had done!
CC#252 on me Galaxy and like I said earlier I know what your saying BUT unfortunately 1 day is not enough time to change things around.
RJJ was P4P but he made the move 1 day before that showdown. I mean I agree with your theory in the sense that he was the best fighter but again moving up into the division 1 day before the fight. I mean it had already been established looong before RJJ moved up that the Hill-Maske would be for the Lineal title.
Re: Who's the lineal champ at 175?
We'll have the agree to disagree Mick, Roy didn't just sign & fight on the same day he planned to move to the division.
Let me ask you this it's not exactly the same as what happened but sort of goes with what I'm saying:
Hypothetically speaking if we had todays rankings but pretend we're back in 1996 if Pacquiao was to say he was moving to 126 & John & Guerrero had signed to fight (I know their not as established as Hill & Maske but just using it as an example) Pacquiao fought a top 10 guy the day before John & Guerrero fought but had planned months ahead to make the move to the division. Would you consider the John/ Guerrero fight for the linear title even though a top P4P fighter was now fighting in that division? You said yourself that the linear title should be decided by the two best in the division fighting each other. So IMO with Jones planning to move & fighting at LH then Hill & Maske weren't the two best in the division & their fight doesn't qualify for the linear championship. Had Jones lost to McCallum then there wouldn't be an issue. But he didn't he established himself as arguably the best LH in the division (He would have been heavily favored over both Maske & Hill) & remained the best fighter P4P in the world!
