Is Linear Championship as prestigious than the alphabets?

[Lance Uppercut]

Ricky Hatton may not hold any major title but he is considered the true champion at light welterweight.

and the greatest boxer EVER. Knocked out a prime castillo with the best body shot EVER.

Prime castillo i don't think so mate.. He knocked an old castillo who was battling the weigh-ins than the actual fight.

Hey antimoron, I think he was using something that us morons like to call sarcasm.

[fan johnny]

Who made "The Ring magazine" God? or all knowing?

Opinions are "subjective" if you don't know the meaning of the word, look it up!

A "Linear Champion" is subjective and has no more or less validity than do the Alphabet Belts. "Prestigious" depends on how many followers respect the title holder. Some "Champions" carry more prestige than others.

The man who beat the man... what a load of BS! The only "True Boxing Champion" is a "UNDISPUTED CHAMPION" including a Linear Champion. You know when there is "one" because everyone agrees he is the "Champion".

The Ring, WBO, WBC, WBA, IBF, IBO and any other contender; when you hold them "ALL" you will surely be an "UNDISPUTED CHAMPION" otherwise you only hold the "Opinion" of the respective followers.

BTW: The Ring Magazine editor Nigel Collins is not "All knowing".

[killersheep]

Who made "The Ring magazine" God? or all knowing?

Opinions are "subjective" if you don't know the meaning of the word, look it up!

A "Linear Champion" is subjective and has no more or less validity than do the Alphabet Belts. "Prestigious" depends on how many followers respect the title holder. Some "Champions" carry more prestige than others.

The man who beat the man... what a load of BS! The only "True Boxing Champion" is a "UNDISPUTED CHAMPION" including a Linear Champion. You know when there is "one" because everyone agrees he is the "Champion".

The Ring, WBO, WBC, WBA, IBF, IBO and any other contender; when you hold them "ALL" you will surely be an "UNDISPUTED CHAMPION" otherwise you only hold the "Opinion" of the respective followers.

BTW: The Ring Magazine editor Nigel Collins is not "All knowing".

Wrong, the policies of the alphabet straps make is next to impossible to unify nowadays. Say fighter 'X' holds the WBO and WBC titles. Without even stepping into the ring fighter 'X' can lose those straps because of the following.
A) Promotional problems and poor business decisions, make it impossible to pay sanctioning fees
Result: Both titles stripped

B) The WBO and WBC have the same timeline requirement to get a mandatory in, but the boxers for the mandatory are different. Fighter 'X' chooses to defend the WBO title
Result: WBC strips the title

C) The WBO decides fighter 'X' is not a good representitive of their organization
Result: WBO strips the title

D) The WBC decides they don't agree with the official decision in the previous fight.
Result: WBC strips the title, and gives it to the man fighter 'X' just beat

E) Fighter 'X' decides he wants to unify against the IBF strapholder.
Result: WBC and WBO don't recognize the IBF champ existing so they both strip the titles

These sound crazy but they are all scenarios that have happened. The Ring Champioship is the only way to properly keep track of who the real champ is. Alphabet straps are nothing more than a marketing tool. Sure you will get more respect if you have more of them, but the only one that ultimately matters is The Ring.

[fan johnny]

So you are arguing that Nigel Collins is "All knowing"?

You thing because "The Ring Magizine" sounds like they have a method which is fair and argue the others are unfair that "The Ring Magizine" is more valid. You obviously didn't put much thought into the meaning of the word "subjective". All Opinions are "subjective".

It doesn't matter "who" says it or what belt "A" Champion holds or doesn't hold. Opinions are not wrong! they are just opinions. Every argument can have valid points and be articulated so that they appear correct. Just because someone can argue better or shout louder doesn't mean they are right or wrong. It just means they have a different opinion.

By "your" argument "The Ring Magazine" does the exact same thing as the alphabets gangs. They only have an opinion not tangable proof.

Let us put "your" crazy argument into a current example: Saying that JMM is "The" World Lightweight Champion because of linage is simply absurd. He beat (1) fighter in the lightweight class. Who else did he beat in the Lightweight class? no one! He lost to MP and he never fought NC or YK . He has to beat every "Contender" and every "Champion" in the "Lightweight Weight Class" to "PROVE" and be "The" " Lightweight World Champion". The term "Linear Champion" has no more validity than does WBC, WBA, WBO, IBF or IBO. it just means that the followers of the respective organization "believe" that the Boxer at the top of their list is A "Champion".

The only way a Champion can be "World Champion" is to defeat all "Champions" and all "Contenders" otherwise his status as a Champion is "DISPUTED".

What really matters is that EVERYONE agrees. And ONLY then, will you have the "UNDISPUTED Champion of the World".

[Lance Uppercut]

So you are arguing that Nigel Collins is "All knowing"?

You thing because "The Ring Magizine" sounds like they have a method which is fair and argue the others are unfair that "The Ring Magizine" is more valid. You obviously didn't put much thought into the meaning of the word "subjective". All Opinions are "subjective".

It doesn't matter "who" says it or what belt "A" Champion holds or doesn't hold. Opinions are not wrong! they are just opinions. Every argument can have valid points and be articulated so that they appear correct. Just because someone can argue better or shout louder doesn't mean they are right or wrong. It just means they have a different opinion.

By "your" argument "The Ring Magazine" does the exact same thing as the alphabets gangs. They only have an opinion not tangable proof.

Let us put "your" crazy argument into a current example: Saying that JMM is "The" World Lightweight Champion because of linage is simply absurd. He beat (1) fighter in the lightweight class. Who else did he beat in the Lightweight class? no one! He lost to MP and he never fought NC or YK . He has to beat every "Contender" and every "Champion" in the "Lightweight Weight Class" to "PROVE" and be "The" " Lightweight World Champion". The term "Linear Champion" has no more validity than does WBC, WBA, WBO, IBF or IBO. it just means that the followers of the respective organization "believe" that the Boxer at the top of their list is A "Champion".

The only way a Champion can be "World Champion" is to defeat all "Champions" and all "Contenders" otherwise his status as a Champion is "DISPUTED".

What really matters is that EVERYONE agrees. And ONLY then, will you have the "UNDISPUTED Champion of the World".

I dont think you understand the way boxing used to work. Along time a go before you were born, before the alphabet titles were payed attention to, there was 1 champion per weight class.

That champion was the man who beat the last champion. Boxing was huge, and it was mainstream sport in american. Just like everyone knew who won the superbowl or the world series champs were, every knew who the boxing champions were.

Then came the alphabet gangs to create numerous nonsense paper titles. Now no one knows who the champions are and boxing is at most, a niche sport.

The Ring is trying to bring back the old bright line rule about champions.

And although you seem fixated on Nigel Collins, he is only the editor. He only has a say, as do all the other expert journalist who determine the rankings.

This is a better option then you beloved alphabet gangs, which give out rankings, not based on merit, but sanctioning fees.

[killersheep]

So you are arguing that Nigel Collins is "All knowing"?

You thing because "The Ring Magizine" sounds like they have a method which is fair and argue the others are unfair that "The Ring Magizine" is more valid. You obviously didn't put much thought into the meaning of the word "subjective". All Opinions are "subjective".

It doesn't matter "who" says it or what belt "A" Champion holds or doesn't hold. Opinions are not wrong! they are just opinions. Every argument can have valid points and be articulated so that they appear correct. Just because someone can argue better or shout louder doesn't mean they are right or wrong. It just means they have a different opinion.

By "your" argument "The Ring Magazine" does the exact same thing as the alphabets gangs. They only have an opinion not tangable proof.

Let us put "your" crazy argument into a current example: Saying that JMM is "The" World Lightweight Champion because of linage is simply absurd. He beat (1) fighter in the lightweight class. Who else did he beat in the Lightweight class? no one! He lost to MP and he never fought NC or YK . He has to beat every "Contender" and every "Champion" in the "Lightweight Weight Class" to "PROVE" and be "The" " Lightweight World Champion". The term "Linear Champion" has no more validity than does WBC, WBA, WBO, IBF or IBO. it just means that the followers of the respective organization "believe" that the Boxer at the top of their list is A "Champion".

The only way a Champion can be "World Champion" is to defeat all "Champions" and all "Contenders" otherwise his status as a Champion is "DISPUTED".

What really matters is that EVERYONE agrees. And ONLY then, will you have the "UNDISPUTED Champion of the World".

He beat the guy that was the champ, doesn't matter who he did or didn't face in the interim. You are never going to have a situation where everyone agrees. And to say that a champion has to face all contenders is absolutely ridiculous. There will always be a new contender on the rise and only so many times one can fight in a year. Who in your lifetime was a "World Champion"? Give me an example.

[fan johnny]

"He beat the guy that was the champ, doesn't matter who he did or didn't face in the interim. You are never going to have a situation where everyone agrees. And to say that a champion has to face all contenders is absolutely ridiculous. There will always be a new contender on the rise and only so many times one can fight in a year. Who in your lifetime was a "World Champion"? Give me an example."

Yea, your right, maybe not every contender, but your statement just reinforces my point! "Read it!"

Linage is often broken: Example: List of current world boxing champions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia You can't continue the line without measuring the contenders. When you look at this list you will see that of the 17 weight classes, 10 have no "Ring" Champions. Oh? so this is what mean? Does this mean that Antonio Margarito is not a real world champion because he doesn't have a linear win on his record?

"The Ring Champion is just a pacifier for the cry babies that don't have a real belt from any of the private sanctioning bodies." Who said that?

For you edification:
Undisputed Champion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Every boxer listed has been in my lifetime. Example:
List of undisputed boxing champions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Professional boxing is evolving.

[boozeboxer]

and the greatest boxer EVER. Knocked out a prime castillo with the best body shot EVER.

Prime castillo i don't think so mate.. He knocked an old castillo who was battling the weigh-ins than the actual fight.

Hey antimoron, I think he was using something that us morons like to call sarcasm.

Lance I miss you. Every thread is ohw the alpha belts are corrupt.

[Lance Uppercut]

Prime castillo i don't think so mate.. He knocked an old castillo who was battling the weigh-ins than the actual fight.

Hey antimoron, I think he was using something that us morons like to call sarcasm.

Lance I miss you. Every thread is ohw the alpha belts are corrupt.

what are you talking about? I am right here. And your right, the alphabet gangs are corrupt.