Quote Originally Posted by Britkid View Post
Quote Originally Posted by ross View Post

This is what iv just been saying.....

Holmes hasnt been the undisputed best. Tyson is the only fighter to have to have as many as 6 successfull defences of all the belts since Ali.

To be 'Undisputed' by definition you need to be unchallenged. To the best of my knowledge, NO fighter has been 'Undisputed' Champion.

What Holmes was, what Tyson was, what Douglas, Holyfield, Bowe et al were, are 'Generally recognized' World Champions.

When Holmes beat Ali, with his W over Weaver to back it up, The Black Cloud became the 'Generally recognized' Champ, a Lineage was formed, and when Tyson beat Spinks, he won the mantle. Tyson also had the WBA, WBC and IBF belts at the time, but even then the WBO were making money selling their trinket to the likes of Damiani...
Bullshit.

We all know how hard it is for a fighter to keep just one title nowadays because of mandatories being forced. Imagine having the 3 main belts and managing to fullfill all your obligations to be able to hold on to the titles and make 6 defences of all 3 titles. This is why people will always say "we need another Mike Tyson" you want hear people begging for another Holmes...

The lineage means nothing when the lineal holder was beaten in 91 seconds. Holding on to something after winning it is just as impressive as the win. Look at Douglas, he was a flash in the pan for 1 fight where the opponent was infamously not training. Beating 6 random, vague fighters because they are in one sancioning bodies rankings is nothing compared to having to clear out a division while holding all 3 major belts