lineal title at HW right now

[Stinky gloves]

Wlad is definitely #1 contender right now.
Who is No2 and No3 who may fight Wlad next to reestablish linear title?


Is it still Peter or maybe Ibragimov or Chagaev or Maskaev?

[brooklyn1550]

No2: Ruslan Chagaev
No3: Sultan Ibragimov

[kg0208]

Chagaev is the clear #2 IMO.

[guncho]

I would love to see Klitschko vs Chagaev! I think that chagaev has chance!

[Rumsfeld]

The linear is vacant.

Despite his poor showing against McCline, Peter still won, so I reckon Wlad and Peter need to fight to officially settle matters.

[Axe]

Wlad is definitely #1 contender right now.
Who is No2 and No3 who may fight Wlad next to reestablish linear title?


Is it still Peter or maybe Ibragimov or Chagaev or Maskaev?

Chagaev and Ibrag are the #2 and #3, respectfully. Chag gets underrated a bit, he did win his title by handing Valuev his first ever loss and he beat the mighty Ruiz.

If Wlad unifies with one of these guys, or better yet beats them both, he is the linear champ by virtue of the #1 vs #2 criteria.

No need to involve the Maskaev-Peter-Vitali We Be Crooks sideshow that's going on atm.

[SteveO]

Wlad v. Peter should be next.

[Claypole]

Wlad as linear champ? Sad times indeed.:sad2

[Stinky gloves]

Chagaev is the clear #2 IMO.

How is the "clear" established by you?

[brooklyn1550]

Wladimir Klitschko vs. Samuel Peter 2 would establish a Ring Magazine champion, but the problem is most fans (including myself) don't think Peter is number 2.

[achillesthegreat]

Peter v Chagaev is where lineal is at. That is the unification of the WBC and WBA. Wlad is considered the best though. Whoever unifies those belts has to defend against the IBF and WBO champ anyway because they'll be considered the next best fighters.

[andyZOR]

Chagaev is the clear #2 IMO.

Agreed

[kg0208]

How is the "clear" established by you?

He beat an unbeaten fighter for his title and a few goog contenders (Ruiz, Virchris). He has looked the best as well. Ibragimov hasn't beaten great competition and has a draw with a fighter that Wlad never threw a right hand against and still stopped him.

Peter has already lost to Wlad, hasn't beaten a top 10 HW and while he won his last fight, it was not a great showing.

[bumdujour]

No2: Ruslan Chagaev
No3: Sultan Ibragimov

:yep

[brooklyn1550]

He beat an unbeaten fighter for his title and a few goog contenders (Ruiz, Virchris). He has looked the best as well. Ibragimov hasn't beaten great competition and has a draw with a fighter that Wlad never threw a right hand against and still stopped him.

Peter has already lost to Wlad, hasn't beaten a top 10 HW and while he won his last fight, it was not a great showing.

Peter has beaten a top 10 heavyweight - James Toney was ranked there both times Peter beat him. Although I guess you could say he has never actually beaten a top 10 true heavyweight.

[Axe]

Can't have a linear title fight without Sugar Wladdy invloved, the universally #1 rated Heavyweight.

[Stinky gloves]

Wladimir Klitschko vs. Samuel Peter 2 would establish a Ring Magazine champion, but the problem is most fans (including myself) don't think Peter is number 2.
Ring magazine isn't the same as lineal. I think the Ring ranks are
appropriate to create Ring title but there should be more general
consensus as who is #2 and #3 to create the linear title.

For example fight of Lacy and Calzaghe were for Ring belt but
Lacy was not recognized as high in general view so that fight
was not for lineal title. Now Kessler is widely recognized as No2
and Kessler-Calzaghe is for both lineal title and Ring belt.

From this point of view there should be wide consensus
(outside the Ring ranks) who is appropriate to fight Wlad for lineal title.

[kg0208]

Peter has beaten a top 10 heavyweight - James Toney was ranked there both times Peter beat him. Although I guess you could say he has never actually beaten a top 10 true heavyweight.
Ah yes, you are correct.

[kg0208]

Ring magazine isn't the same as lineal. I think the Ring ranks are
appropriate to create Ring title but there should be more general
consensus as who is #2 and #3 to create the linear title.

For example fight of Lacy and Calzaghe were for Ring belt but
Lacy was not recognized as high in general view so that fight
was not for lineal title. Now Kessler is widely recognized as No2
and Kessler-Calzaghe is for both lineal title and Ring belt.

From this point of view tere should be wide consensus
(outside the Ring ranks) who is appropriate to fight Wlad for lineal title.
Ring rated Kessler #2 when Lacy fought Calzaghe. No one knows why the "special circumstances" clause was invoked.

BTW, as far as I know, and based on current lineal champions, the WBA and WBC unification doesn't equate to Lineal status. Otherwise Erdai wouldn't be Lineal at LHW.

[Punisher33]

Peter and Chagaev should fight, thats a fight would like to see. I give it a 50/50, Peter might do well considering Chagaev is nearly the same hieght at 6'1 and Peter being naturally bigger as well. Great fight that would help clear up the mess in the heavywieght division.

Sultan should not be considered as a better ranking than Peter, his last 2 fights were not only boring but against weak opposition like Holyfield and Briggs.

[LennoxGOAT]

He beat an unbeaten fighter for his title and a few goog contenders (Ruiz, Virchris). He has looked the best as well. Ibragimov hasn't beaten great competition and has a draw with a fighter that Wlad never threw a right hand against and still stopped him.

Peter has already lost to Wlad, hasn't beaten a top 10 HW and while he won his last fight, it was not a great showing.


Ownage.

[Stinky gloves]

BTW, as far as I know, and based on current lineal champions, the WBA and WBC unification doesn't equate to Lineal status. Otherwise Erdai wouldn't be Lineal at LHW.

As fas as the linear champion is established, you have to beat him to get his tile.
Thats why Jones didn't have it nor Hopkins doesn't.

The linear champion at HW is vacant so any case to establish it again (unification or not) is valid.

[kg0208]

As fas as the linear champion is established, you have to beat him to get his tile.
Thats why Jones didn't have it nor Hopkins doesn't.

The linear champion at HW is vacant so any case to establish it again (unification or not) is valid.

You're missing the point. I know you have to beat the champ to get the title. Erdai beat Gonzalez, who beat DM, who beat Hill to get it. But Hill got it whenit was vacated by unifying with Maske. Maske was the IBF champion, Hill was the WBA champion. The WBC was not in play. So if you need the WBC and the WBA, then Hill would never have been champ for the line to start again.

That is why I said the WBA and WBC according to who the Lineal champions are now is not needed to establish lineage. You need a clear #1 vs #2 which should be established by unification most of the time.

[Stinky gloves]

You're missing the point. I know you have to beat the champ to get the title. Erdai beat Gonzalez, who beat DM, who beat Hill to get it. But Hill got it whenit was vacated by unifying with Maske. Maske was the IBF champion, Hill was the WBA champion. The WBC was not in play. So if you need the WBC and the WBA, then Hill would never have been champ for the line to start again.

That is why I said the WBA and WBC according to who the Lineal champions are now is not needed to establish lineage. You need a clear #1 vs #2 which should be established by unification most of the time.
Agree ... which particular belt is involved doesn't matter.
However its very rare that some fighters are recognized
as #1 and #2/3 and they both have no belts at that time
and there is no currently other linear champion.

I did ask some time ago but there was no clear answer:
who exactly decides if the fight is establishing new liner title or not?

[PH|LLA]

When the belts are unified, Wlad will be lineal

[Stinky gloves]

When the belts are unified, Wlad will be lineal
But if he loses then his opponent become lineal as well?

I mean, you may justify that Wlad wins over Ibragimov may give him linear title
even if you consider Maskavev and Chagavev over Ibragimov ...
but is the same case working for Ibragimov if he baets Wlad?

[Asterion]

Ruslan Chagaev or Sultan Ibragimov.

[Rumsfeld]

Can't have a linear title fight without Sugar Wladdy invloved, the universally #1 rated Heavyweight.

True, but it's unfortunate we've not had a linear champ since Lewis retired.

(And no, I never recognized Vitali as the linear champ as a result of his beating the Golfer who ousted his little brother who was in no way, shape, or form the consensus #2 or #3 fighter on any objective list!)

[Axe]

Agree ... which particular belt is involved doesn't matter.
However its very rare that some fighters are recognized
as #1 and #2/3 and they both have no belts at that time
and there is no currently other linear champion.

Good post. :good

Also: KG, if you check the Ring mag ratings from November 1996, Hill was #2 and Maske was #1 at 175 lbs. This was the consensus among all boxing publications at the time. That info is actually still up in the boxrec encyclopedia section.

[PH|LLA]

But if he loses then his opponent become lineal as well?

I mean, you may justify that Wlad wins over Ibragimov may give him linear title
even if you consider Maskavev and Chagavev over Ibragimov ...
but is the same case working for Ibragimov if he baets Wlad?
i meant all 4 belts. (or you could make a case for 3 of the 4 but honestly it should be all 4)

[thesandman]

But if he loses then his opponent become lineal as well?

I mean, you may justify that Wlad wins over Ibragimov may give him linear title
even if you consider Maskavev and Chagavev over Ibragimov ...
but is the same case working for Ibragimov if he baets Wlad?
Linear doesn't matter who is ranked #1 or #2 etc. Or who has belts.

That's how Briggs got it - by beating Foreman - who beat Moorer, etc.

Then Lewis (by beating Briggs) - Rahman - Lewis.

Now nobody.

Unification is required for a new linear champ. Ring belt is very different.


IF the line is broken, then unifying the ABC belts is required for a new line to start. Some say just WBA & WBC. Some say any 2 of the main 3 - some say all 3.

I personally think it should be all 3, but that's getting harder and harder these days.

[kg0208]

Good post. :good

Also: KG, if you check the Ring mag ratings from November 1996, Hill was #2 and Maske was #1 at 175 lbs. This was the consensus among all boxing publications at the time. That info is actually still up in the boxrec encyclopedia section.

Yes, they were both rated #1 and #2. What I am saying is that this proves that unifying the WBA and WBC is NOT needed to create a lineal champion.

Truth be told, no one seems to know a clear way.

[Heavyrighthand]

Peter v Chagaev is where lineal is at. That is the unification of the WBC and WBA..

No, Peter does not have the WBC title. It still belongs to Maskaev for KOing Rahman.

Let us not forget that. Peter has NO title till (if) he beats Maskaev.

Maskaev is the WBC champion til its taken away from him in the ring.

[Butch Coolidge]

Wladimir Klitschko<Lamon Brewste< Sergei Lyakhovich<Shannon Briggs<Sultan Ibragimov>Evander Holyfield.