Separate names with a comma.
Come at me mates
Chavez Jr. and Pacquiao at Jr. Middleweight were both disgraceful
Others have mentioned him but Charles Martin is the first one that came to my mind too. Winning a vacant title against a guy who got injured during the fight. That really is pretty much the most paper way to win a title.
That said, if you compare Martin to someone like Saunders then he doesn't look much worse in terms of having a paper reign.
Martin became a paper champ but he cashed out and challenged basically one of the division's biggest threats almost immediately. Within 3 months of winning the title he was mixing it up at the top for a few million.
Saunders, by contrast, won the title fair and square from Lee but then proceeded to ransom the belt, turning down good fights, looking for a cash out against Canelo or Golovkin, having a tantrum when that backfired, clogging up a corner of the division in the process and getting his knuckles rapped by the WBO for being lazy.
At least Martin, once he got the belt, didn't make a mockery of his reign. He acted how we would want a champ to act. Saunders won the title more legitimately but is currently the furthest thing away from a genuine champ I can think of.
Never heard of him.
For me Nathan Cleverly, he won his first world title by just being in the number 1 spot or something he didnt even fight to win it he just defended it, then his second one Braehmer got injured lol luckiest guy in boxing
Also luckiest heavyweight of all time. Got a title handed to him and didn't he make like $4 million fighting Joshua because of it? Lucky bastard!
The whole Super/Regular/Interim stuff from the WBA is a joke. Hard to take them seriously and i view them as the least credible "world" titles due to this farce.
How difficult would it be to say interim faces regular or both get stripped, winner faces the super champ or both get stripped and then have one belt per division?
Could have the mess cleaned up in about 6 months...but they prefer collecting 3 sanctioning fees.
Luis Santana. Was the real champion at 154 winning by DQ from Terry Norris and also defended against Norris successfully by DQ only to get knocked out in the third fight. He was a journeyman that got lucky to get a title shot vs a moron that didn't know when to stop punching and they were acting jobs, not even legit DQ's.
I know it's hard to realize boxing existed pre 2005 but(spoiler alert) it did. Newbhookboxing
well i agree to a point, but worried that it might lead to solid operators who had dodgy records i.e. francisco quiroz, saoul mamby, manning galloway, kelvin seabrooks, freddie pendleton.
i'm still cool with saying eric aiken. though charles martin will most probably be the idolised one if he doesnt do much in his return in the next few years.
there are plenty of world champions who won a title undeservedly then come back better or vica versa.fiegenbutz is woeful but....the man is 21 years old he has (for the modern age of health and athletic science) could have 19 years of unifying p4p performances...i doubt it but still.
p.s. i might be drifting away from the santana norris debacle so don't think some of the points above have anything to do with what you said. i'm not forcing opinions into your mouth.
his dive against tyson was a disgrace.
Miguel Velasquez and Pedro Carrasco both won their world titles by DQ in fights that they were losing. They'd go on to lose their titles in the very next fight. Both Spaniards were good fighters, but I'd say would qualify as paper champs.