BoxRec

Well that was quick, WBO have given a 10 day deadline for Fury to explain his injury, in all honesty I think the WBO and WBA will strip him regardless !

http://www.skysports.com/boxing/news/12 ... cal-status

kbackup408 wrote:in all honesty I think the WBO and WBA will strip him regardless !

It doesn't really matter - his health and well-being is more important.
Anyway, he will continue to be the lineal champion unless he decides to retire.
He could always come back and try to reclaim the belts at a later date, if he wants to.

Ive seen a post on facebook that they have now discussed the issues. Not sure which other boxing forum its on though.

They said they have already given the details to Wlad's team so it really shouldn't be an issue.

It's simple he should've made Champion in Recess that allows the belts to be freed and the sanctioning bodies making their fees.. I think This NADA hearing in November needs dealt with and can get a decision on where he goes from there..

Then you see the difference between having the media against you, like Fury and having the media in your advantage, like Wilder.

Why 10 days?

Surely he doesn't need that long to explain himself?

It's quite clear they're chomping at the bit to strip him as they're not making any money from sanctioning fees whilst Fury is lying idle, so they might as well cut the crap & strip him now.

Best thing to do. Hopefully, someone will collect the belts again and then if and when fury is back, the big fight is on.

Anyone know what's gonna happen with the WBA Super belt? Not 100% sure but I was under the impression it can't be won as a vacant belt. You can only win it by defending your WBA World belt five times, or by winning and taking it off the champion

DannyMCR wrote:Anyone know what's gonna happen with the WBA Super belt? Not 100% sure but I was under the impression it can't be won as a vacant belt. You can only win it by defending your WBA World belt five times, or by winning and taking it off the champion

I suppose it will become vacant until a new WBA champion unifies the WBA title with another one - either the IBF, WBC or WBO:
http://www.wbaboxing.com/wba-super-cham ... -wZP73me0M

Incidentally, Wladimir Klitschko is still the WBO super champion according to their website:
http://www.wboboxing.com/wp-content/upl ... .-2016.pdf

SteveO wrote:

DannyMCR wrote:Anyone know what's gonna happen with the WBA Super belt? Not 100% sure but I was under the impression it can't be won as a vacant belt. You can only win it by defending your WBA World belt five times, or by winning and taking it off the champion

I suppose it will become vacant until a new WBA champion unifies the WBA title with another one - either the IBF, WBC or WBO:
http://www.wbaboxing.com/wba-super-cham ... -wZP73me0M

Incidentally, Wladimir Klitschko is still the WBO super champion according to their website:
http://www.wboboxing.com/wp-content/upl ... .-2016.pdf

Ah yeah, that's the one mate! Knew I'd missed something

daviddee wrote:It's simple he should've made Champion in Recess that allows the belts to be freed and the sanctioning bodies making their fees.. I think This NADA hearing in November needs dealt with and can get a decision on where he goes from there..

Champion in recess is exactly what should happen. The boxing community has an opportunity here to lead the line and set an example regarding mental health issues.

Judging by some of the ill informed tweets I've read about tysons current mental state, if the sanctioning bodies strip fury they are just sending a message to the masses that metal health sicknesses aren't serious illnesses.

Im sure wlad pulled out of a fight sighting an injury when the rumour was his wife was suffering from mental illness. It will be interesting to see his reaction to this? I will be disappointed if it is not as understanding as it should be.

Looking like it's going to be Parker v Ruiz for the vacant WBO belts.

Fury should be stripped of his titles and made champion in recess. When he is fit ( if he ever will be) he should be made immediate mandatory.

That is fair IMO.

You are not a lineal champion or any champion if you dont defend your title after one year. Regardless of the reason. Only in boxing you can hear such a nonsense. Exception is champion in recess of course because that mean you are not an active champion but will get a mandatory shot at a title when ready. I support that but only for the duration of another year.

When you pull off the stunts Tyson has during the last year you've got to expect the vultures to start circling when things go wrong.

Really wished they just accepted the rematch in Germany were the £$€ was.

Tarkus wrote:You are not a lineal champion or any champion if you dont defend your title after one year. Regardless of the reason. Only in boxing you can hear such a nonsense. Exception is champion in recess of course because that mean you are not an active champion but will get a mandatory shot at a title when ready. I support that but only for the duration of another year.

Sorry to disappoint you but a lineal champion remains so until he loses, retires or dies - whichever comes first.

SteveO wrote:

Tarkus wrote:You are not a lineal champion or any champion if you dont defend your title after one year. Regardless of the reason. Only in boxing you can hear such a nonsense. Exception is champion in recess of course because that mean you are not an active champion but will get a mandatory shot at a title when ready. I support that but only for the duration of another year.

Sorry to disappoint you but a lineal champion remains so until he loses, retires or dies - whichever comes first.

So if he refuses to defend and never fights again he is still the champion till doomsday? LOL to that. One should compile a book "boxing fan logic" with the amount of unbelievable nonsense boxing fans come up with.

Tarkus wrote:So if he refuses to defend and never fights again he is still the champion till doomsday?

Obviously not til doomdsay. At some point he would be assumed to have retitired and would have lost his boxing license.
I agree there should be a reasonable time limit for such things but it is what it is.
A few examples from the past:
John L Sullivan was champion for 7 years before he defended the title against Corbett.
Corbett took a 3 year break before he defended against Fitzsimmons.
Willard took a 3 year break before defending against Dempsey.
Dempsey took a 3 year break before defending against Tunney.
Joe Louis had 4 years off between the Abe Simon and Baer fights (I know the war played a part in that one).
Nevertheless, all the above remained the lineal champion.

Naandrew wrote:Looking like it's going to be Parker v Ruiz for the vacant WBO belts.

Fury should be stripped of his titles and made champion in recess. When he is fit ( if he ever will be) he should be made immediate mandatory.

That is fair IMO.

I agree,

SteveO wrote:

Tarkus wrote:So if he refuses to defend and never fights again he is still the champion till doomsday?

Obviously not til doomdsay. At some point he would be assumed to have retitired and would have lost his boxing license.
I agree there should be a reasonable time limit for such things but it is what it is.
A few examples from the past:
John L Sullivan was champion for 7 years before he defended the title against Corbett.
Corbett took a 3 year break before he defended against Fitzsimmons.
Willard took a 3 year break before defending against Dempsey.
Dempsey took a 3 year break before defending against Tunney.
Joe Louis had 4 years off between the Abe Simon and Baer fights (I know the war played a part in that one).
Nevertheless, all the above remained the lineal champion.

Those are examples form ancient history that are not applicable today. I dont even know if there was the lineal champion then at all? Because that became needed when the numerous belts and therefore the numerous champions sprung up.

Governing bodies already have title defense regulations. Of course it is only IBF that enforces them strictly but nevertheless there is a time given for mandatory defense. You miss it you are not a champion. Simple. Why should we make exception for Fury? What is he a great champion or something? He won one single fight, hasn't given a rematch, hasn't defended even once and still has to be called the world champion for 3 years? Crazy!

Tarkus wrote:Governing bodies already have title defense regulations. Of course it is only IBF that enforces them strictly but nevertheless there is a time given for mandatory defense. You miss it you are not a champion.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying but the various organization champions are only belt holders.
Lineal means 'the man who beat the man', there is no way around it.
If Fury retires or is not allowed to box again, there will be a new lineage created at some point.
It all a bit premature though - we don't actually know what's happening with Tyson yet.

Tarkus wrote:

SteveO wrote:

Tarkus wrote:You are not a lineal champion or any champion if you dont defend your title after one year. Regardless of the reason. Only in boxing you can hear such a nonsense. Exception is champion in recess of course because that mean you are not an active champion but will get a mandatory shot at a title when ready. I support that but only for the duration of another year.

Sorry to disappoint you but a lineal champion remains so until he loses, retires or dies - whichever comes first.

So if he refuses to defend and never fights again he is still the champion till doomsday? LOL to that. One should compile a book "boxing fan logic" with the amount of unbelievable nonsense boxing fans come up with.

Tyson Fury is the Lineal champ, the money men can't strip him of that I'm afraid. You are posting on this forum for 6 years and you don't even know what the Lineal Champion is or it's significance?

You expect this sort of thing from the Hearn bum boys on twitter. Come back when you know the basics kid.

God. What a mess....

peter barlow wrote: Tyson Fury is the Lineal champ, the money men can't strip him of that I'm afraid. You are posting on this forum for 6 years and you don't even know what the Lineal Champion is or it's significance?

You expect this sort of thing from the Hearn bum boys on twitter. Come back when you know the basics kid.

I not only know basics and beyon but also have a brain and the ability to think critically. Unlike many of you self proclaimed hard cores who like parrots only repeat the nonsense they hear. So kid, learn thinking before engaging in a debate with a grown up.

SteveO wrote:

Tarkus wrote:Governing bodies already have title defense regulations. Of course it is only IBF that enforces them strictly but nevertheless there is a time given for mandatory defense. You miss it you are not a champion.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying but the various organization champions are only belt holders.
Lineal means 'the man who beat the man', there is no way around it.
If Fury retires or is not allowed to box again, there will be a new lineage created at some point.
It all a bit premature though - we don't actually know what's happening with Tyson yet.

Now you suggesting then if Fury decided not to fight for 20 years and also will not retire, he stays a lineal champion. There is no way around the fact that you need to defend the title to be a champion. And in a reasonable time frame.

You people are victims of dogmatic reasoning. Lineal Champion is not a magic term. To be a "lineal champion", first you have to be a "champion". Not defending title makes you a former champion, regardless of belts and governing bodies. Quite simple seems to me.