I've read an article on one of Polish sites about Vladimir who has a chance to take all big four titles. However there was a sentence that the last boxer who was considered as an undisputed heavyweight champion was Lennox Lewis who had WBC, WBA and IBF titles because WBO title, which was belonged to Vitali Klitschko, wasn't so valuable then.
What do you think about it? Is it true? The WBO title is more valuable today than it was in the past? Was Lennox Lewis the last undisputed heavyweight champion? I know that a lot of you don't make a big difference between these 4 titles, some of you think about them in a hierarchy (I opened a topic about WBO, WBA, WBC and IBF and I wanted to put the link to it here but... it seems like this topic is gone...
![[icon_e_confused.gif] :confused:](./images/smilies/icon_e_confused.gif)
I don't see it in my "view your posts" and I don't find it in a search engine and I don't know why) - but have you always thought about them as equal? I think there's no magic wand which can make some titles valuable from the beginning and all federations had to convince people that their titles are important so that was a process. So, in that time WBO wasn't one of the big four? It means that Lennox Lewis can be called "the last undisputed heavyweight champion". Is it really sensible to call boxers "undisputed"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qk7Dper7BNc&t=33m38s
;)