Any undisputed champions?
Any undisputed champions?
Now that Mayweather has retired, I believe there is only one undisputed champion in all of the weight classes (Klitshco). Am I missing a weight class with one guy that is definitely on top? Or do we only have an undisputed division now at the heavyweight division and none in all of the other divisions?
Re: Any undisputed champions?
Depends on you criteria.
There are several fighters who hold the lineal title in their division but aren't widely considered the clear No1 (e.g. Adonis Stevenson, Miguel Cotto)
Andre Ward and Rigondeaux must be undisputed in their respective divisions, I would have thought.
There are several fighters who hold the lineal title in their division but aren't widely considered the clear No1 (e.g. Adonis Stevenson, Miguel Cotto)
Andre Ward and Rigondeaux must be undisputed in their respective divisions, I would have thought.
Re: Any undisputed champions?
Undisputed champion is a one holding 4 major belts. There are none. The closest ones are Wlad and Kovalev.
-
ttornado
- Heavyweight

Re: Any undisputed champions?
It's almost 2 years since Ward fought at 168. I don't think that is good enough to be considered super mid undisputed champion.
I'm talking about the commonly acknowledged best, not the technical undisputed.
I'm talking about the commonly acknowledged best, not the technical undisputed.
Re: Any undisputed champions?
That one definition of it, but as far as I can remember it's only Hopkins and Taylor that have ever held all four. I wonder how long before they add another belt to the list.ikorolev wrote:Undisputed champion is a one holding 4 major belts. There are none. The closest ones are Wlad and Kovalev.
Last edited by JC on 28 Sep 2015, 11:26, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Any undisputed champions?
can see this descending into a " what does undisputed mean " type of thread !
Re: Any undisputed champions?
Thats the ONLY definition of itJ-C wrote:That one definition of it, but as far as I can remember it's only Hopkins and Taylor that have ever held all four. I wonder how long before they add another belt to the list.ikorolev wrote:Undisputed champion is a one holding 4 major belts. There are none. The closest ones are Wlad and Kovalev.
Re: Any undisputed champions?
Fair enough, I thought beating the guy who had previously unified the belts would make you undisputed, regardless of if they still held all the belts. But I stand corrected.littlepug wrote:Thats the ONLY definition of itJ-C wrote:That one definition of it, but as far as I can remember it's only Hopkins and Taylor that have ever held all four. I wonder how long before they add another belt to the list.ikorolev wrote:Undisputed champion is a one holding 4 major belts. There are none. The closest ones are Wlad and Kovalev.
Re: Any undisputed champions?
Rigo kinda is undisputed at Super bantam
Donaire won WBO then won IBF then beat the WBC champ Nishioka but the belt wasn't on the line maybe as Nishioka didn't have a fight for nearly a year.
He was stripped of the IBF and never given the WBC when he lost to WBA champ Rigo.
Really do think there should just be one champ but the WBA having just one champ in each weight class is a good start.
Donaire won WBO then won IBF then beat the WBC champ Nishioka but the belt wasn't on the line maybe as Nishioka didn't have a fight for nearly a year.
He was stripped of the IBF and never given the WBC when he lost to WBA champ Rigo.
Really do think there should just be one champ but the WBA having just one champ in each weight class is a good start.
Re: Any undisputed champions?
I think the confusion stems from boxings misuse of the word which differs from the dictionary definition, in boxing terms it just means one holder of all the major belts which could be 1,2,3 or 4 depending on the era and is no indication of lineal, pound for pound or best in the division 
-
ClivePatrickLyons
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 2811
- Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 22:10
Re: Any undisputed champions?
THANK YOU SOME PEOPLE SHOULD STOP MOVING THE FU..ING GOAL POST'S WHEN IT SUITS THEM LIKE INCLUDING THE IBO AS ONE OF THE 4 MAJORikorolev wrote:Undisputed champion is a one holding 4 major belts. There are none. The closest ones are Wlad and Kovalev.
GOVERNING BODY OF LEGIT WORLD CHAMPION'S AND INTERIM DOESN'T QUALIFY YOU HAS A WORLD CHAMPION EITHER NOW THE LAST TIME I CHECKED YOU ARE GIVEN THE TAG AS UNDISPUTED WORLD CHAMPION WHEN YOU HOLD ALL 4 LEGIT WORLD TITLE'S AT THE SAME TIME THE WBO DID'NT MAKE THE CUT IN IT'S EARLY DAY'S BACK THEN YOU ONLY HAD TO HOLD THE OTHER 3 TO BE UNDISPUTED WORLD CHAMPION
EVEN MAYWEATHER WAS'NT UNDISPUTED IN ANY WEIGHT CLASS HE BOXED IN..............
-
tiny_acres
- Middleweight
- Posts: 9464
- Joined: 17 Feb 2014, 14:43
Re: Any undisputed champions?
I'm still trying to figure out when the WBO became a legit world title.ClivePatrickLyons wrote:THANK YOU SOME PEOPLE SHOULD STOP MOVING THE FU..ING GOAL POST'S WHEN IT SUITS THEM LIKE INCLUDING THE IBO AS ONE OF THE 4 MAJORikorolev wrote:Undisputed champion is a one holding 4 major belts. There are none. The closest ones are Wlad and Kovalev.
GOVERNING BODY OF LEGIT WORLD CHAMPION'S AND INTERIM DOESN'T QUALIFY YOU HAS A WORLD CHAMPION EITHER NOW THE LAST TIME I CHECKED YOU ARE GIVEN THE TAG AS UNDISPUTED WORLD CHAMPION WHEN YOU HOLD ALL 4 LEGIT WORLD TITLE'S AT THE SAME TIME THE WBO DID'NT MAKE THE CUT IN IT'S EARLY DAY'S BACK THEN YOU ONLY HAD TO HOLD THE OTHER 3 TO BE UNDISPUTED WORLD CHAMPION
EVEN MAYWEATHER WAS'NT UNDISPUTED IN ANY WEIGHT CLASS HE BOXED IN..............
One day it was a joke and then the next day it was legit.
Hell I remember the same thing with the IBF 30 years ago....What makes a belt legit?
Re: Any undisputed champions?
Voting on this forum..tiny_acres wrote:I'm still trying to figure out when the WBO became a legit world title.ClivePatrickLyons wrote:THANK YOU SOME PEOPLE SHOULD STOP MOVING THE FU..ING GOAL POST'S WHEN IT SUITS THEM LIKE INCLUDING THE IBO AS ONE OF THE 4 MAJORikorolev wrote:Undisputed champion is a one holding 4 major belts. There are none. The closest ones are Wlad and Kovalev.
GOVERNING BODY OF LEGIT WORLD CHAMPION'S AND INTERIM DOESN'T QUALIFY YOU HAS A WORLD CHAMPION EITHER NOW THE LAST TIME I CHECKED YOU ARE GIVEN THE TAG AS UNDISPUTED WORLD CHAMPION WHEN YOU HOLD ALL 4 LEGIT WORLD TITLE'S AT THE SAME TIME THE WBO DID'NT MAKE THE CUT IN IT'S EARLY DAY'S BACK THEN YOU ONLY HAD TO HOLD THE OTHER 3 TO BE UNDISPUTED WORLD CHAMPION
EVEN MAYWEATHER WAS'NT UNDISPUTED IN ANY WEIGHT CLASS HE BOXED IN..............
One day it was a joke and then the next day it was legit.
Hell I remember the same thing with the IBF 30 years ago....What makes a belt legit?
-
Like a Boss
- Light Heavyweight
- Posts: 5863
- Joined: 01 May 2012, 03:21
Re: Any undisputed champions?
Winning 4 major titles at the same time is close to impossible because of the requirement of each organisation to fulfill mandatory fights from their own list of challengers.
Re: Any undisputed champions?
No because it's nearly impossible these days. Kovalev or Stevenson would be the only ones I can see in the future but that looks unlikely. Same as Wlad vs Wilder for various reasons.
Re: Any undisputed champions?
There's a female boxer at the moment who holds all of the belts I think, her name escapes me though!
Re: Any undisputed champions?
Undisputed is pretty simply owning all four belts. Lineal Champion is basically "the man that beat the man". Sergio Martinez was the lineal Middleweight Champion until Cotto defeated him and now Cotto is the lineal champ even though he never fights at the required Middleweight weight limits but that's another story.
Another example of the confusing state of boxing; Serge Kovalev owns 3 out of the 4 belts at light heavy but Adonis Stevenson is considered the "lineal" champion because he beat Chad Dawson who was lineal champion at the time. Chad Dawson earlier beat lineal champion Bernard Hopkins for the title.
I think it's the sports writers and pundits trying to ignore the multitude of belts in each division. I think it's THEIR way to crown 1 legitimate champion per division which makes sense to me. I do believe in lineal champion idea but it doesn't hold water when guys like Adonis refuse to fight Kovalev and put that title on the line so i think that is one case where Kovalev will soon be considered Lineal Champ without beating the guy that beat the guy. And i agree whole heartedly.
Another example of the confusing state of boxing; Serge Kovalev owns 3 out of the 4 belts at light heavy but Adonis Stevenson is considered the "lineal" champion because he beat Chad Dawson who was lineal champion at the time. Chad Dawson earlier beat lineal champion Bernard Hopkins for the title.
I think it's the sports writers and pundits trying to ignore the multitude of belts in each division. I think it's THEIR way to crown 1 legitimate champion per division which makes sense to me. I do believe in lineal champion idea but it doesn't hold water when guys like Adonis refuse to fight Kovalev and put that title on the line so i think that is one case where Kovalev will soon be considered Lineal Champ without beating the guy that beat the guy. And i agree whole heartedly.
Re: Any undisputed champions?
GGG and Wlad. No I don't care what the alphabet groups say.
-
tiny_acres
- Middleweight
- Posts: 9464
- Joined: 17 Feb 2014, 14:43
Re: Any undisputed champions?
\caldo2025 wrote:Undisputed is pretty simply owning all four belts. Lineal Champion is basically "the man that beat the man". Sergio Martinez was the lineal Middleweight Champion until Cotto defeated him and now Cotto is the lineal champ even though he never fights at the required Middleweight weight limits but that's another story.
Another example of the confusing state of boxing; Serge Kovalev owns 3 out of the 4 belts at light heavy but Adonis Stevenson is considered the "lineal" champion because he beat Chad Dawson who was lineal champion at the time. Chad Dawson earlier beat lineal champion Bernard Hopkins for the title.
I think it's the sports writers and pundits trying to ignore the multitude of belts in each division. I think it's THEIR way to crown 1 legitimate champion per division which makes sense to me. I do believe in lineal champion idea but it doesn't hold water when guys like Adonis refuse to fight Kovalev and put that title on the line so i think that is one case where Kovalev will soon be considered Lineal Champ without beating the guy that beat the guy. And i agree whole heartedly.
You can not change Lineal...It is the lineage of the title.You have to beat the Lineal champ.
Or the lineage must be broken to declare a new Lineal
-
Syntax Error
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 9011
- Joined: 22 Apr 2005, 08:00
Re: Any undisputed champions?
This is a great question.J-C wrote:That one definition of it, but as far as I can remember it's only Hopkins and Taylor that have ever held all four. I wonder how long before they add another belt to the list.ikorolev wrote:Undisputed champion is a one holding 4 major belts. There are none. The closest ones are Wlad and Kovalev.
I've always wanted to know what an alphabet organisation has to do to become considered amongst the elite?
I remember when the WBO first launched & their titles were considered to be a joke; in fact, in some quarters, they weren't even recognised; now they're considered to be one of the belts to have in order to be known as 'undisputed'.
What will be the next alphabet organisation to gain this status & just how many belts is a fighter of the future going to need to be considered 'undisputed'?
I can imagine in about 40 years time that a so-called undisputed champion will need to hire a van to have all his belts driven into the ring because they'll be that many!
Re: Any undisputed champions?
Not if Haymon has his way!Syntax Error wrote:This is a great question.J-C wrote:That one definition of it, but as far as I can remember it's only Hopkins and Taylor that have ever held all four. I wonder how long before they add another belt to the list.ikorolev wrote:Undisputed champion is a one holding 4 major belts. There are none. The closest ones are Wlad and Kovalev.
I've always wanted to know what an alphabet organisation has to do to become considered amongst the elite?
I remember when the WBO first launched & their titles were considered to be a joke; in fact, in some quarters, they weren't even recognised; now they're considered to be one of the belts to have in order to be known as 'undisputed'.![]()
What will be the next alphabet organisation to gain this status & just how many belts is a fighter of the future going to need to be considered 'undisputed'?
I can imagine in about 40 years time that a so-called undisputed champion will need to hire a van to have all his belts driven into the ring because they'll be that many!![]()
-
Boxing Prospect
- Light Heavyweight
- Posts: 6592
- Joined: 25 Jun 2012, 14:35
Re: Any undisputed champions?
Braekhus, who is now chasing an IBO title as wellTheWigwam wrote:There's a female boxer at the moment who holds all of the belts I think, her name escapes me though!
Whilst not technically the same we do have a WBA/WBC Atomweight title fight coming up, that will unify 2 of the 3 recognised titles at the weight.
Re: Any undisputed champions?
If someone holds just 1 belt in their division, and the other 3 titles are currently vacant, can that champion holding just the 1 belt be classed as undisputed? He is after all the only true recognisable world champion in his weight division. There's no other champion for him to be in dispute with.
Re: Any undisputed champions?
Hmm... interesting idea suppose he sorta would be and also not, so to sum up I don't know but probably notchad wrote:If someone holds just 1 belt in their division, and the other 3 titles are currently vacant, can that champion holding just the 1 belt be classed as undisputed? He is after all the only true recognisable world champion in his weight division. There's no other champion for him to be in dispute with.
-
tiny_acres
- Middleweight
- Posts: 9464
- Joined: 17 Feb 2014, 14:43
Re: Any undisputed champions?
chad wrote:If someone holds just 1 belt in their division, and the other 3 titles are currently vacant, can that champion holding just the 1 belt be classed as undisputed? He is after all the only true recognisable world champion in his weight division. There's no other champion for him to be in dispute with.
Holy cow!!!! I had to laugh out loud on this.I guess you could say he would be undisputed but it is disputable.
This topic is too funny..I just can not see too many people ever attaining all 4 belts because of politics.