handsofstone wrote: ↑08 Apr 2023, 14:52
Is Fury the only lineal champ in boxing? I swear I never hear the term banded about anywhere, we've had plenty undisputed champions lately but never lineal, who's the lineal champ in the divisions that don't have undisputed champs?
yep, fury bois and his team go on about it far far more than ive ever heard it done for any other fighter ever. it's an obsession for them.
notice the timeline of when 'lineal' started dramatically increasing as a keyword according to google basically, when fury came back after losing his belts and other fighters picked them up, the fury bois needed something to cling on to, and lineal it became
Last edited by margaret thatcher on 08 Apr 2023, 17:23, edited 2 times in total.
handsofstone wrote: ↑08 Apr 2023, 14:52
Is Fury the only lineal champ in boxing? I swear I never hear the term banded about anywhere, we've had plenty undisputed champions lately but never lineal, who's the lineal champ in the divisions that don't have undisputed champs?
yep, fury bois and his team go on about it far far more than ive ever heard it done for any other fighter ever. it's an obsession for them.
notice the timeline of when 'lineal' started dramatically increasing as a keyword according to google basically, when fury came back after losing his belts and other fighters picked them up, the fury bois needed something to cling on to, and lineal it became
handsofstone wrote: ↑08 Apr 2023, 14:52
Is Fury the only lineal champ in boxing? I swear I never hear the term banded about anywhere, we've had plenty undisputed champions lately but never lineal, who's the lineal champ in the divisions that don't have undisputed champs?
yep, fury bois and his team go on about it far far more than ive ever heard it done for any other fighter ever. it's an obsession for them.
notice the timeline of when 'lineal' started dramatically increasing as a keyword according to google basically, when fury came back after losing his belts and other fighters picked them up, the fury bois needed something to cling on to, and lineal it became
Mind you for hardcore boxing purists the lineal title meant something. For most so called fans of the sport the title means nothing. It was always held up to a higher standard in the heavyweight division than any other weight class because the heavyweight division was saw as the crown jewel of all sports titles.
That's why when you look at the history of boxing it's usually the heavyweight division where the term lineal pops up most. Whether that be Johnson vs Jefferies or Louis vs Charles or even the first Ali vs Frazier fight, because there was always an argument as to who the true world's champion was.
And whether anyone likes it or not basically Tyson Fury has a claim which goes all the way back to James Figg. Then again so does Shannon Briggs. Lennox Lewis did not become the lineal champion until he defeated him.
People can look at it as a self marketing ploy but it was effective regardless. He never lost a fight to anyone so therefore the title never changed hands. So when he made his come back he was campaigning as the true world champion. And considering Joshua ended up losing multiple times and so did Wilder, Fury's claim was only solidified that he was the genuine article and everyone else was a pretender.
HomicideHenry wrote: ↑08 Apr 2023, 19:03
Mind you for hardcore boxing purists the lineal title meant something. For most so called fans of the sport the title means nothing. It was always held up to a higher standard in the heavyweight division than any other weight class because the heavyweight division was saw as the crown jewel of all sports titles.
That's why when you look at the history of boxing it's usually the heavyweight division where the term lineal pops up most. Whether that be Johnson vs Jefferies or Louis vs Charles or even the first Ali vs Frazier fight, because there was always an argument as to who the true world's champion was.
And whether anyone likes it or not basically Tyson Fury has a claim which goes all the way back to James Figg. Then again so does Shannon Briggs. Lennox Lewis did not become the lineal champion until he defeated him.
People can look at it as a self marketing ploy but it was effective regardless. He never lost a fight to anyone so therefore the title never changed hands. So when he made his come back he was campaigning as the true world champion. And considering Joshua ended up losing multiple times and so did Wilder, Fury's claim was only solidified that he was the genuine article and everyone else was a pretender.
Hmm, although now I suspect people will more remember him as the Sven Ottke of the heavyweights, a very inactive Sven Ottke at that. In one of the weakest eras on record.
HomicideHenry wrote: ↑08 Apr 2023, 19:03
Mind you for hardcore boxing purists the lineal title meant something. For most so called fans of the sport the title means nothing. It was always held up to a higher standard in the heavyweight division than any other weight class because the heavyweight division was saw as the crown jewel of all sports titles.
That's why when you look at the history of boxing it's usually the heavyweight division where the term lineal pops up most. Whether that be Johnson vs Jefferies or Louis vs Charles or even the first Ali vs Frazier fight, because there was always an argument as to who the true world's champion was.
And whether anyone likes it or not basically Tyson Fury has a claim which goes all the way back to James Figg. Then again so does Shannon Briggs. Lennox Lewis did not become the lineal champion until he defeated him.
People can look at it as a self marketing ploy but it was effective regardless. He never lost a fight to anyone so therefore the title never changed hands. So when he made his come back he was campaigning as the true world champion. And considering Joshua ended up losing multiple times and so did Wilder, Fury's claim was only solidified that he was the genuine article and everyone else was a pretender.
Hmm, although now I suspect people will more remember him as the Sven Ottke of the heavyweights, a very inactive Sven Ottke at that. In one of the weakest eras on record.
Could be worse. We could be in the 1910s where people like Jess Willard was champion for years and only defended the title successfully once. Much as I love guys like Bob Fitzsimmons they purposely held on to the title as long as they could before defending it. Jack Dempsey did not defend the title for 3 years I think before facing Gene Tunney.
HomicideHenry wrote: ↑08 Apr 2023, 19:03
Mind you for hardcore boxing purists the lineal title meant something. For most so called fans of the sport the title means nothing. It was always held up to a higher standard in the heavyweight division than any other weight class because the heavyweight division was saw as the crown jewel of all sports titles.
That's why when you look at the history of boxing it's usually the heavyweight division where the term lineal pops up most. Whether that be Johnson vs Jefferies or Louis vs Charles or even the first Ali vs Frazier fight, because there was always an argument as to who the true world's champion was.
And whether anyone likes it or not basically Tyson Fury has a claim which goes all the way back to James Figg. Then again so does Shannon Briggs. Lennox Lewis did not become the lineal champion until he defeated him.
People can look at it as a self marketing ploy but it was effective regardless. He never lost a fight to anyone so therefore the title never changed hands. So when he made his come back he was campaigning as the true world champion. And considering Joshua ended up losing multiple times and so did Wilder, Fury's claim was only solidified that he was the genuine article and everyone else was a pretender.
Hmm, although now I suspect people will more remember him as the Sven Ottke of the heavyweights, a very inactive Sven Ottke at that. In one of the weakest eras on record.
Ia it because they both had so many fights away from home, usually in opponents back yards?
HomicideHenry wrote: ↑08 Apr 2023, 19:03
Mind you for hardcore boxing purists the lineal title meant something. For most so called fans of the sport the title means nothing. It was always held up to a higher standard in the heavyweight division than any other weight class because the heavyweight division was saw as the crown jewel of all sports titles.
That's why when you look at the history of boxing it's usually the heavyweight division where the term lineal pops up most. Whether that be Johnson vs Jefferies or Louis vs Charles or even the first Ali vs Frazier fight, because there was always an argument as to who the true world's champion was.
And whether anyone likes it or not basically Tyson Fury has a claim which goes all the way back to James Figg. Then again so does Shannon Briggs. Lennox Lewis did not become the lineal champion until he defeated him.
People can look at it as a self marketing ploy but it was effective regardless. He never lost a fight to anyone so therefore the title never changed hands. So when he made his come back he was campaigning as the true world champion. And considering Joshua ended up losing multiple times and so did Wilder, Fury's claim was only solidified that he was the genuine article and everyone else was a pretender.
Hmm, although now I suspect people will more remember him as the Sven Ottke of the heavyweights, a very inactive Sven Ottke at that. In one of the weakest eras on record.
Ia it because they both had so many fights away from home, usually in opponents back yards?
Fury has made 3 defences of the title; 2 of which have been in the UK ...
He beat a Ukrainian in Germany for title initially.
Then the home USA fighter in USA .. hardly impressive is it - best compare him to David Hayes heavyweight reign next time
The big 4, (Hagler, Hearns, Duran and Leonard) got away with not facing Mike McCallum because he didn’t have the profile, and there were other big challenges out there, ie each other. Similarly Benn and Eubank didn’t want a bar of Herol Graham, but had plenty going on anyway. The big difference with Fury subtly, (or not subtly) avoiding Joshua, Usyk and Joyce is that there are no other credible figures out there really. Just finding fighters to face from the lower levels, with lots of big big gaps in-between is wearing thin. Fury is getting old soon too.
mickey1975 wrote: ↑09 Apr 2023, 03:49
David Haye? The bloke who froze and barely won a round against Wlad. Wilder - Audley? What are you on this morning Tony?
Yep - that David Haye
There aren't any obvious other world heavyweight title holders who've held the title for so long with worse CVs than Fury's .. David Haye seemed a generous name to compare Fury with
mickey1975 wrote: ↑09 Apr 2023, 03:49
David Haye? The bloke who froze and barely won a round against Wlad. Wilder - Audley? What are you on this morning Tony?
Yep - that David Haye
There aren't any obvious other world heavyweight title holders who've held the title for so long with worse CVs than Fury's .. David Haye seemed a generous name to compare Fury with
Stop it Tony…. Can you really not name many heavyweight champions who don’t have as good a wins as Wlad and Wilder on their records?
mickey1975 wrote: ↑09 Apr 2023, 03:49
David Haye? The bloke who froze and barely won a round against Wlad. Wilder - Audley? What are you on this morning Tony?
Yep - that David Haye
There aren't any obvious other world heavyweight title holders who've held the title for so long with worse CVs than Fury's .. David Haye seemed a generous name to compare Fury with
Stop it Tony…. Can you really not name many heavyweight champions who don’t have as good a wins as Wlad and Wilder on their records?
You’ve definitely got a bad case of tunnel vision. You know Wlad was almost 40. Most athletes are in gradual decline throughout their 30’s, which is why a lot stop in their mid-30’s. Wlad probably only carried on that long because the heavyweight division is so bereft of actual talent. And as for Wilder - you know he would not survive in any other era but this one? You could literally have put roly-poly James Toney in with him in the noughties, and he would have ducked and weaved, figured Wilder out and stopped him in the second half!
Last edited by polecateddy on 09 Apr 2023, 04:37, edited 3 times in total.
There aren't any obvious other world heavyweight title holders who've held the title for so long with worse CVs than Fury's .. David Haye seemed a generous name to compare Fury with
Stop it Tony…. Can you really not name many heavyweight champions who don’t have as good a wins as Wlad and Wilder on their records?
You’ve definitely got a bad case of tunnel vision. You know Wlad was almost 40. Most athletes are in gradual decline throughout their 30’s, which is why a lot stop in their mid-30’s. Wlad probably only carried on that long because the heavyweight division is so bereft of actual talent. And as for Wilder - you know he would not survive in any other era but this one?
No, not really. He’s only lost to Fury and came very close to knocking him out twice. Olympic bronze medalist. Again, I could name an awful lot of Heavyweight champions he could have beaten. Loads.
mickey1975 wrote: ↑09 Apr 2023, 04:26
Stop it Tony…. Can you really not name many heavyweight champions who don’t have as good a wins as Wlad and Wilder on their records?
You’ve definitely got a bad case of tunnel vision. You know Wlad was almost 40. Most athletes are in gradual decline throughout their 30’s, which is why a lot stop in their mid-30’s. Wlad probably only carried on that long because the heavyweight division is so bereft of actual talent. And as for Wilder - you know he would not survive in any other era but this one?
No, not really. He’s only lost to Fury and came very close to knocking him out twice. Olympic bronze medalist. Again, I could name an awful lot of Heavyweight champions he could have beaten. Loads.
As I said above, Wilder would have been eaten alive by any number of unfashionable names. James Toney would have had a field day against a heavyweight lacking such basic skills.
wilder's hardly the worst out there, that power is serious, but my gawd are his wins thin. bermane stiverne and dom breazeale are prob still among the 3 best guys he's beaten in almost 50 fights. an utter sh!tload of can crushing he's done over the years.
You’ve definitely got a bad case of tunnel vision. You know Wlad was almost 40. Most athletes are in gradual decline throughout their 30’s, which is why a lot stop in their mid-30’s. Wlad probably only carried on that long because the heavyweight division is so bereft of actual talent. And as for Wilder - you know he would not survive in any other era but this one?
No, not really. He’s only lost to Fury and came very close to knocking him out twice. Olympic bronze medalist. Again, I could name an awful lot of Heavyweight champions he could have beaten. Loads.
As I said above, Wilder would have been eaten alive by any number of unfashionable names. James Toney would have had a field day against a heavyweight lacking such basic skills.
At Heavy? Wow. That Prizefighter must have really impressed you.
I saw a respected name, can’t remember who, with no connections to Wilder or Fury, saying Wilders skills are underrated, setting up the right as if they weren’t how come it’s hit everyone? Surely someone must be good enough to not get hit by hit.
Twinkle Toes wrote: ↑09 Apr 2023, 04:34
What is Fury even doing, Warren hasnt got a clue or is too scared to ask him. Meanwhile Usyk training hard for Dubois.
Speaks volumes.
Absolutely nothing , Fury doesn't have much of a legacy right now
HomicideHenry wrote: ↑08 Apr 2023, 19:03
Mind you for hardcore boxing purists the lineal title meant something. For most so called fans of the sport the title means nothing. It was always held up to a higher standard in the heavyweight division than any other weight class because the heavyweight division was saw as the crown jewel of all sports titles.
That's why when you look at the history of boxing it's usually the heavyweight division where the term lineal pops up most. Whether that be Johnson vs Jefferies or Louis vs Charles or even the first Ali vs Frazier fight, because there was always an argument as to who the true world's champion was.
And whether anyone likes it or not basically Tyson Fury has a claim which goes all the way back to James Figg. Then again so does Shannon Briggs. Lennox Lewis did not become the lineal champion until he defeated him.
People can look at it as a self marketing ploy but it was effective regardless. He never lost a fight to anyone so therefore the title never changed hands. So when he made his come back he was campaigning as the true world champion. And considering Joshua ended up losing multiple times and so did Wilder, Fury's claim was only solidified that he was the genuine article and everyone else was a pretender.
Being the man who beat the man has always meant something. People still doubted Jack Johnson until he faced Jim Jeffries. Mike Tyson had all the belts but the megafight was against Michael Spinks who was the man who beat the man. Roy Jones held all the main belts but didn't face the lineal champion who had been stripped of 2 of them and this was controversial. Naseem Hamed beat all the belt holders but dumped them all and became lineal and the man because of this. Barrera continued this. And ofcourse no one saw Joe Frazier as the champ despite unifying the belts until he beat Ali.
Now this doesn't change the fact that Fury coined 'Lineal Champ' because he was stripped of all his belts and he needed something to cling onto. But no one is the outright champ without beating him. In turn he won't get the fans props without facing the man who holds all the belts with arguably the best HW resume.
basically, when fury came back after losing his belts and other fighters picked them up, the fury bois needed something to cling on to, and lineal it became
