The Heavyweight King

Showtime’s Brian Custer recently referred to Deontay Wilder as the “world heavyweight champion” and so contributed to the mass confusion in boxing. Would-be fans —precisely the demographic the sport needs to attract— scratched their heads and wondered what the hell happened two weeks ago when Tyson Fury defeated Wladimir Klitschko and was declared the “heavyweight champion of the world.” An unknown number of them reached for the clicker.

Wilder: NOT the heavyweight champion.
Confusion reigns: Deontay Wilder, the other “world heavyweight champion.”

The Transnational Boxing Rankings Board, a fifty-member, all-volunteer initiative representing eighteen countries invites them to put the clicker down and stay tuned. It recommends approaching the sport as they would a holiday with family. When Uncle Ralph staggers over to intrude on a pleasant exchange to claim something is, which you know assuredly is not, wave him off. If he can’t take a hint and proves immune to courteous correction, escort him to the door and lock him out in the cold.

Boxing is overrun with Uncle Ralphs; if only they were so easy to avoid. We find them well-poised on television and meticulous in print, but their claims regarding the championships are gobbledygook. Do any of them really believe there are 86 legitimate champions in the 17 weight divisions? Do they know the difference between Deontay Wilder’s belt and the divisional crown?

THE CROWN VS BELTS

Above the nonsense and the din, the Board insists that Tyson Fury is heavyweight king. He takes his place in a succession that includes the vanquished Wladimir Klitschko, fellow Briton Lennox Lewis, Fury’s namesake Mike Tyson, and thirty-three others give or take. Each divisional succession is an ongoing march through history with expected breaks and disruptions and which began with the first championship bout fought under the Marquess of Queensberry rules. The heavyweights’ stretch back at least to Gentleman Jim Corbett, if not John L. Sullivan — both sons of Éire like Fury himself.

Wlad can't run from his antagonist.
Fury, the rightful champion, celebrates his historic win.

Anyone with more sense than a partridge in a pear tree knows that there are two paths into a divisional succession: (1) defeat the true champion or (2) if said champion retires or otherwise abdicates, earn a top-two ranking and defeat the top or next-best contender.

And what of “world heavyweight champion” Wilder? He did neither. In January 2015, he defeated Bermane Stiverne (then ranked third in the Transnational Rankings when Wilder was ranked sixth) after both contenders surrendered a percentage of their purses to the WBC. That belt Wilder carries is quite literally bought and paid for. It’s a fabrication; a fabrication puffed up by boxing media as something more but that had nothing to do with Wladimir Klitschko and therefore had nothing to do with the heavyweight crown.

Wilder was fervent anyway. “I want to fight four times a year,” he said afterward. “Whoever’s ready, I’m ready.” The response of ESPN’s Dan Rafael was proof positive that the language in the sport must change: “Fight fans who have been searching for a [sic] American heavyweight champion surely are also.”

Tyson Fury understands the problem better than most. “If I want a belt, I can go and buy one,” he said last year. “It’s pointless. There’s the status of saying you’re a ‘world champion’, but when there’s twenty-five different world sanctioning bodies, it doesn’t mean nothing.”

TYSON FURY IN MUHAMMAD ALI’S FOOTSTEPS

Earlier this month, the IBF stripped Fury of their belt because of his intention to give Klitschko a rematch. The heavyweight king responded while doing roadwork. “They should take all of them away from me if they want,” he told reporter Peter Lane. “But they’ll never take what I’ve done.”

Ali: a champion who took risks.
Is the outspoken Fury following in the footsteps of the outspoken Ali?

He’s in good company. The WBA pulled the same stunt on Muhammad Ali in 1964 after he agreed to a rematch against Sonny Liston. It was a move laughed at by yesterday’s more discerning boxing writers. “The WBA is an imaginary organization,” wrote Red Smith. “When Liston and Clay fight again and the winner is recognized as champion by the public, the press, and the participants, the WBA’s pretensions to power must evaporate.” At the other end of Ali’s career, the WBC took their own swing at his legacy when they stripped Leon Spinks in 1978 for agreeing to fight him in a rematch. They “awarded” the belt to Ken Norton and it was begrudgingly acknowledged by increasingly less-discerning boxing writers.

Trainer Peter Fury was more correct than we supposed when he compared Fury’s upset win over Klitschko with Ali’s upset win over Liston. Fury’s recent dismissal of homosexuality and the value of women in society left him wide open for censure, but Ali said worse. Before becoming America’s secular saint, Ali was a divisive figure who routinely thumbed his nose at the majority culture. “A black man should be killed if he’s messing with a white woman,” he said during a Playboy interview in 1975. And what of a Black Muslim woman who wants to go out with a white man? “Then she dies. Kill her, too.”

In case you haven’t noticed, Ali is celebrated by the very demographic that now condemns Fury.

A HERALD OF CHANGE?

Fury, who shuffled his feet familiarly a few times during the Klitschko fight, can likewise redefine himself as something other than a provocateur of the political left; he can step forward as a herald of change in boxing. Reform is in the air. And in his ear: “Gonna speak with [promoter] Mick [Hennessy] and & Tyson to give all belts away. Win em & vacate the lot. Money racket,” tweeted his trainer on December 9. “We know who the real champ is.”

Klitschko will need a new game plan next time around.
Some want us to overlook that Fury beat the man, who beat the man, who beat the man …

The IBF, WBA, WBC, et al. would rather we didn’t. Unaccountable to anything outside their counting houses, they will continue to thrive in the mass confusion and make decisions based solely on their interests.

The heavyweight king is expected to do what is in his interests, but he is now also signaling his willingness to do something more.

The Transnational Boxing Rankings Board’s only interest resides in that “something more.” It will continue to provide clarity for fans and fighters alike by publishing clean, globally-represented rankings at www.tbrb.org and identifying “the real champs” with virtual crowns that don’t cost a thing.          — Springs Toledo

3 thoughts on “The Heavyweight King

  • December 26, 2015 at 4:31 am
    Permalink

    Great article mate.

    Love to hear a writer talk about Ali before he became the media hero, before he wised up and became the gentleman he was later to genuinely become. I have seen interviews with him upset at having been drafted and explaining that it shouldn’t happen because he was now a rich man. Saying that his taxes could buy bombers and tanks fro the war effort. That as of course before he found the more media friendly “they never called me nigger” line.

    I like Fury and I like his attitude to the game, he acts the nut but I don’t believe it, not entirely anyway. He seems an unhinged smart c”*t if you ask me, his (and his equally clever and severely underrated Uncle trainer Peter) game plan to take what was Wlad’s shows just that. Long may the king reign and long may he put the pretenders to the proverbial sword.

    Reply
  • December 27, 2015 at 3:32 am
    Permalink

    So this Board named Alvarez the king of middleweight and Chikenson – light-heavyweight kingpin? Are you and they nuts?

    Reply
    • December 27, 2015 at 8:50 am
      Permalink

      Terry, the Board didn’t “name” anyone anything. From the article itself: “…there are two paths into a divisional succession: (1) defeat the true champion or (2) if said champion retires or otherwise abdicates, earn a top-two ranking and defeat the top or next-best contender.” Alvarez beat Cotto, who beat Martinez, who beat Pavlik and so on. Stevenson beat Dawson. We may not think of Canelo and Stevenson as the best in their division–I certainly don’t–but if they defeated the previous reigning champions, then they get the crown until they abdicate or lose to someone else. This logic favours simplicity and consistency over arbitrarily “naming” champions or stripping them. If you have a better idea for keeping track of titles, please, by all means, we’re all ears.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *