Undisputed?

Matt W · Post by **Matt W** » 05 Nov 2007, 10:00

It seems that this term is getting more and more diluted and harder and harder to understand by the general public.

The fight on Saturday was announced by Buffer as undisputed and the papers today are saying Calazghe is undisputed champion despite the IBF belt not being on the line.

Heard a few guys talking about Calzaghe in a cafe today and it is obvious by how they were arguing with each other that the average bloke knows sweet FA about titles nowadays.

Aren't boxing politics sh1te?

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 05 Nov 2007, 11:00

Yes, it's the single most damaging factor for the sport.

When you get Audley announced live on the BBC as 'the heavyweight champion of the world', you know things are getting serious.

chinny · Post by **chinny** » 05 Nov 2007, 13:27

As Bill Hicks (I think) once said "If its undisputed what the hell are they fighting for".

lankester · Post by **lankester** » 05 Nov 2007, 14:51

calzaghe already won the ibf and never lost it in the ring. I'm a fan of bute (the ibf champ), but it'll be foolish to say that Calzaghe is not the undisputed champ, because Bute have the ibf belt.

Ally-M1 · Post by **Ally-M1** » 05 Nov 2007, 15:59

With Three of the Four 'Major' portions of the World Title, plus the Ring Magazine Belt - Calzaghe is, without doubt, the Undisputed Champion at 168...

Having won the IBF title (and having it stripped for not wishing to fight the not overly impressive Robert Stieglitz) and all the other titles he currently holds, it can't be argued that he is not...

On Saturday, he beat who he had to beat, IBF Title Holder Lucian Bute (who is good) does not warrant being ranked alongside Joe... Defeating Kessler furthers his satus as the Undipusted Champion of 168.

Matt W · Post by **Matt W** » 05 Nov 2007, 16:09

A number of valid points here which beg the question, how do we define undisputed nowadays?

The term that used to be used to get around issues such as Calzaghe being stripped of the IBF belt was 'universally recognised'.

The fact that such things need to be considered shows how fuking bollocks it is. Only in boxing.... :x

Further note on the uneducated argument in the cafe today was how apparently Joe is now 3 P4P behind Mayweather & Hatton.

WildWaylon · Post by **WildWaylon** » 05 Nov 2007, 16:12

lankester wrote:calzaghe already won the ibf and never lost it in the ring. I'm a fan of bute (the ibf champ), but it'll be foolish to say that Calzaghe is not the undisputed champ, because Bute have the ibf belt.

You are absolutely right, but he didnt win the WBU, sorry only joking.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 05 Nov 2007, 16:16

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:Yes, it's the single most damaging factor for the sport.

When you get Audley announced live on the BBC as 'the heavyweight champion of the world', you know things are getting serious.

it also allows talented fighters to get devloped and ultimately, if there is a lot of talent, you get more good fighters. even Joe won a vacant title and grew into it. like IBF champ Bute is doing now

there are loads of negatives though.

Anway, Joe doesn't have the WBA regular belt, only the super version.

All we need to know is that Joe is the man at the weight, which he either proved vs Lacy or Kessler. That he beat both makes him the clear #1.

Ally-M1 · Post by **Ally-M1** » 05 Nov 2007, 16:26

Boxing Politics... Suck!

Matt W · Post by **Matt W** » 05 Nov 2007, 16:26

Autobarn wrote:
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
Anway, Joe doesn't have the WBA regular belt, only the super version.

That says it all really...