Stevenson vs Bellew, Kovalev - Sillakh

Not if they ALL Fight til Late 30's+, which will Likely Be the Case...

 

I thought that recently actually, pretty damn weird that this new generation of good fighters are not significantly younger than the old ones.

They do have less miles on the clock though obviously, so hopefully they can be elite fighters throughout their 30's like REED said.

 

I'd def expect Rigo to manage that but the other guys styles being what they are i'd be less sure. Peter Quillin is over 30 as well. Weird indeed.

 

They Pretty Much All had Looooooooooooonger, More EXTENSIVE Ammy Careers, than is the Norm, as Well...That Explains It...

 

How is Erdei "lineal champ" when he lost his last fight? I didn't think it was a good decision but he still lost.

 

It was a 10 round fight so his lineal 'title' was not/could not be at stake.

If you have a 12 round fight without a main 4 belt on the line, I suppose it could go either way, but with a 10 round fight it's not a title fight.

 

I don't think it works like this. It was an official fight in the same weight class, thus the title was in line. Dempsey-Tunney was also a ten rounder and title changed hands. Also, had Marvis Frazier beaten Larry Holmes, he would have been the champ in the eyes of everyone (except alphabets) even though the fight was ten rounder

 

if joe fraziers son had beat holmes by 10 round decision he wouldve only been the heavyweight champ of philly.

 

no. the champ can participate in a non-title fight, it used to be a regular practice. champs used to do it to stay busy, and the title was not on the line in these fights.. eg duran lost to dejesus, but was still the champion

 

Yep, there's title fights and non title fights, simple as that. Titles obviously don't change hands in a non title fight.

 

For the linear title , every fight is a title fight. That's the point of the concept.

 

Gotta say I agree, it's a bit of a grey area but I think any fight the lineal champion loses while being "champ" should count as the title changing hands.

 

Adonis Stevenson and Sergey Kovalev each won their bouts by KO, which means "knockout".

 

This is true apart from heavyweights, but the number of rounds is not the defining factor, especially since Erdei is not the champion in any other way than as the linear titlist. Any other legitimacy he has lost by not fighting his best contenders in years

 

The number of rounds is a defining factor since it should be a title fight in order to have a title on the line. In men's fights, title fights are 12 rounds. It also results in a linear title being something that matters. While I prefer that a big 4 title also be on the line, one can envision a lineal champ defending only the IBO belt, for example.

If you start claiming that a lineal title is on the line for every fight, regardless of distance, weight, etc...you gut its importance. If you claim that there is no such thing as a non-title fight for lineal champs, you are fighting tradition and common sense. I suppose that if a lineal champ wants to claim he is defending his 'title' in a fight less than 12 rounds, there would be something more to discuss, but these days title fights are 12 rounds.

 

how about if its a loss by four round decision?

 

Yeah, but holding the title forever without facing an actual contender is against tradition and common sense too. If it isn't, Joe Calzaghe is still the champion of the world. Thus, since the only thing that makes Erdei 'a champion' is the fact that he hasn't been beaten since winning the title, him losing, IMO, uncrowns him, since he hasn't had title fights (12 rounders) in four years anyway

 

If you retire, you lose the title. If you unretire, create a disruption in the space/time continuum, but a factor then becomes how long since you last fought.

Erdei is a problematic example of a lineal champion who isn't the best fighter in his division and who isn't defending his title. However, he is still the lineal champ. While I think that often and usually means a guy has the best claim to the 'title', there are exceptions. For the people who simplistically claim one world, therefore only one world champ, Erdei is who you are stuck with.

 

This line of thinking would lead to premise that Foreman vs Grimsley was the legitimate heavyweight world title fight in November '96, whereas Tyson-Holyfield was just a scrap between two contenders. Also, Tyson vs Holy II was of lesser importance than Foreman - Savarese later that year. I have never seen anyone taking these stands. This way, a linear legitimate titlist can lose his crown if he doesn't defend it, even if he doesn't lose. And if the guy is not even fighting 12 rounders, how can he possibly retain the crown when he LOSES a fight? If Erdei retires, he should be called as a guy who retired as an undefeated champion

 

You forget or don't know, but I support sanctioning bodies, in part because they prevent a guy getting away with doing what Foreman did. You are conflating 'legitimate' with 'lineal'. They are separate concepts and don't always overlap.

Champions retain crowns all the time when they lose. These days it generally happens when the opponent is overweight, but there are other ways.

 

The existence of sanctioning bodies as a deterrent to the shady practices of Foreman's later title reign is pretty hard to take seriously... First of all, they existed and the shady practices continued unabated... Secondly, the fact that there were other belts for various top fighters to fight for was not a hindrance to Foreman... If anything, it helped... The existence of an alternate "World Championship" meant there would be less pressure from the public, from promoters, from venues, etc on Foreman to defend his version of the title... So Foreman won't defend against Tyson or Holyfield or Lennox Lewis?? Big deal, there are other belts for those guys to contest ... Don King can say "who cares about Foreman? I will make Tyson/Holyfield and call it a world title fight and nobody will argue and I'll make a shitload of money off of it" ... The sanctioning body gives legitimacy to this "other" world title while enabling the Lineal guy to continue bullshitting...

This is one of many reasons why the pro-Lineal position makes no sense to me and never has... If it was corrupted enough to warrant the existence of numerous different organizations rating a champion of the world in the first place, how can it now be held up as a kind of gold standard many decades past the point where Sanctioning bodies became a reality? "The reason sanctioning bodies are great is because the Lineal, one-champ system was flawed. Oh also, the Lineal champ is generally the most credible.":scratcher: