BoxRec

One thing that has always bugged me about boxing is the politics these sanctioning bodies play, WBC, WBA, WBO, IBF.

IBF are sticking Pulev onto AJ like a raging bull when clearly in my opinion in boxing terms this will be a breeze. If Wlad destroyed Pulev in 5 I think AJ would beat him in a similar fashion (I know boxing mathematics doesn't always work but this is just a strong feeling after watching Pulev fight Chisora)

Do you think we will have an Undisputed HW Champ in 2018 or is that unrealistic ?

we could easily have a unified champ and it would be AJ in all probability. But it may not be in the short term interests of the money men and therefore probably wont happen.

rm1 wrote:we could easily have a unified champ and it would be AJ in all probability. But it may not be in the short term interests of the money men and therefore probably wont happen.

He IS a unified champ

Undisputed would be very hard to achieve in any weight division

I think it's possible, they just should fight more often and always fight the biggest risk instead of just another bum. Wilder hasn't fought since his lab was suspended, AJ said he only wants to fight once every 6 months at max, Stiverne, Fury, what are they diveroing? Malik Scott really only fights just enough to stay in the boxrec rankings, Povetkin, max once every 6 months, and even then only if Wilder his lab doesn't make another "mistake".
Wilder could have fought Stiverne ages ago, but just sat down waiting. Then suddenly he acts like he wants to fight someone like he always does when he knows the fight won't happen and in the end he fights a bum anyway while wasting time on purpose.

Undisputed? Probably not. Universally recognised as "The Man" with just BS moves by alphabet boys disputing it, very possible

A fighter doesn't need all of the titles to be the undisputed champion.

There just needs to not be any real dispute about who the champ is.

Ossyrules wrote:Undisputed would be very hard to achieve in any weight division

Crawford Indongo happening shortly.
No reason AJ and Hearn can't work out a deal with the governing bodies to give each an equal split of the fortunes he will make...

It could happen but the problem is whoever did it would be lucky to make one defence before the titles became split again

Horse wrote:A fighter doesn't need all of the titles to be the undisputed champion.

There just needs to not be any real dispute about who the champ is.

Very true

wesshaw1985 wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:Undisputed would be very hard to achieve in any weight division

Crawford Indongo happening shortly.
No reason AJ and Hearn can't work out a deal with the governing bodies to give each an equal split of the fortunes he will make...

Yes true and good on all parties involved, but before them it was Hopkins at 160 to hold them all. So not very common

we have an undisputed HW Champ...

Horse wrote:A fighter doesn't need all of the titles to be the undisputed champion.

There just needs to not be any real dispute about who the champ is.

You are right, but in the literal sense undisputed = all the belts. Golovkin is the man at 160, but Saunders still is a recognised champion

wesshaw1985 wrote:we have an undisputed HW Champ...

? We technically have 3 officially recognised heavyweight champs.

Ossyrules wrote:You are right, but in the literal sense undisputed = all the belts. Golovkin is the man at 160, but Saunders still is a recognised champion

Saunders' claim for being the champion is very weak.

The lineage of the WBO title goes back less than three years and there has only been 3 fights for the WBO title in it's current run.

Andy Lee vs Matt Korobov, Billy Joe Saunders vs Andy Lee & Billy Joe Saunders vs Artur Akavov. A weak lineage and a very weak claim for being the man.

The winner of Golovkin vs Alvarez is the undisputed champion.

Ossyrules wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote:we have an undisputed HW Champ...

? We technically have 3 officially recognised heavyweight champs.

Tyson Fury is the undisputed HW Champ...

Undisputed- holds all 4 recognised belts (ignore dictionary definition), Unified- holds more than one recognised belt, Lineal- the man who beat the man that beat the man ect ect (breakages may occur), no1/P4P in the division- the man generally considered the best in the division regardless of titles held.

wesshaw1985 wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote:we have an undisputed HW Champ...

? We technically have 3 officially recognised heavyweight champs.

Tyson Fury is the undisputed HW Champ...

Wilder held the WBC during tysons reign, so he wasnt undisputed

Horse wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:You are right, but in the literal sense undisputed = all the belts. Golovkin is the man at 160, but Saunders still is a recognised champion

Saunders' claim for being the champion is very weak.

The lineage of the WBO title goes back less than three years and there has only been 3 fights for the WBO title in it's current run.

Andy Lee vs Matt Korobov, Billy Joe Saunders vs Andy Lee & Billy Joe Saunders vs Artur Akavov. A weak lineage and a very weak claim for being the man.

The winner of Golovkin vs Alvarez is the undisputed champion.

I agree with you in principle, but simply if boxing recognises the WBO as a legitimate body and there belts are recognised as official world titles, then as long as Saunders holds the wbo, there is no undisputed champion, though clearly is the proper champion

Ossyrules wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:
? We technically have 3 officially recognised heavyweight champs.

Tyson Fury is the undisputed HW Champ...

Wilder held the WBC during tysons reign, so he was undisputed

undisputed in boxing doesn't follow the dictionary definition, it simply means one man holding all the recognised belts (in this case 4), it doesn't mean any more or less than that.

littlepug wrote:undisputed in boxing doesn't follow the dictionary definition, it simply means one man holding all the recognised belts (in this case 4), it doesn't mean any more or less than that.

Wrong.

It can happen, but it all depends on Joshua. If he lost to Pulev I can't imagine Wilder or Parker caring about a fight with Kubrat. AJ brings the paychecks.

Horse wrote:

littlepug wrote:undisputed in boxing doesn't follow the dictionary definition, it simply means one man holding all the recognised belts (in this case 4), it doesn't mean any more or less than that.

Wrong.

No, that's right horse

wesshaw1985 wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:

wesshaw1985 wrote: Tyson Fury is the undisputed HW Champ...

Wilder held the WBC during tysons reign, so he was undisputed

Fury had IBF, WBA, WBO

Wilder had WBC

So whilst fury was the champ, to be undisputed he'd need the final piece, Wilders WBC