Better resume Holmes or Wladimir

[BigAlexSand]

wooooooooooow

holmes resume is light years away & I'm willing to debate anyone who disagrees (I'm no wlad hater ether)

if you guys posed this question to a historical Boxing expert you'll get laughed at. (not even joking)

Agreed...

Holmes:
Won title at 28-0 against Ken Norton( Who's record at the time was 40-4); winning the WBC belt! He defended his WBC belt over 17 times before Relinquishing the title. ( Defended his belt against Earnie Shavers, Muhammad Ali, Trevor Berbick, Leon Spinks, Randall Cobb, and Tim Witherspoon to name a few). He did relinquish title for the IBF title, in which he defened 3 times. Before losing to Michael Spinks, Holmes went to 48-0! Ending his career at 69-6 (loses to Spinks twice, Mike Tyson, Oliver McCall, Brain Neelsen, and Evander Holyfield.

Klitschko:
Lost to Ross Puritty (record at time of defeat 24-0) who had a record of 25-13-1. Lost to Corrie Sanders at 40-1. At this time Wlad still hadn't won a major title. He lost again to Lamon Brewster at 42-2. He finally won a major at title (being the IBF title) at 46-3 against Chris Byrd. He has defended his title 12 times since winning it AMD has gathered a couple others.

My final comment; after lose of his trainerll, the great Emanuel Steward; will Wlads career still strive?
DOUBTFUL!

[D-MiZe]

I am also taking into account Holmes lost 6 times, regardless he was older fighter when he retired.

Do you take into account SRR's 19 losses?


@Smokin: Draw up Wlad's 5 best and Holmes' 5 best and just compare, there is a clear level difference. Sure, Holmes doesn't have a much stronger resume than Wlad but there is a clear distance IMO.

You couldn't even make the claim that Wlad beat someone who went on to become something either. There is still time left but I doubt they'll be made against the likes of Price & Fury. He needs to really sort out bouts with Pulev & Povetkin, the former being the next good heavyweight champion.

[Daddy T]

I am also taking into account Holmes lost 6 times, regardless he was older fighter when he retired.

DON'T take into account losses way after prime, you'll screw yourself in any wlad versus anybody debate especially holmes who went 48-0... Holmes lost to tyson, spinks(disputed), holyfield etc while past prime ......... wlad WHILE prime lost to sanders, purity and Brewster, fighters that are miles below that level.

It's like saying ali is crap because he lost to berbick and marciano is the GOAT because he quit before losing to anybody. If Rocky had fought on and lost to say patterson and liston while past prime would that mean he was crap?

[BigAlexSand]

I am also taking into account Holmes lost 6 times, regardless he was older fighter when he retired.

Well the fact your boy didn't win a major title till his 49th fight, while Larry did it in his 28th and went undefeated till the time your boy won one going 48-0 before losing a unanimous decision to Spinks.

[D-MiZe]

DON'T take into account losses way after prime, you'll screw yourself in any wlad versus anybody debate especially holmes who went 48-0... Holmes lost to tyson, spinks(disputed), holyfield etc while past prime ......... wlad WHILE prime lost to sanders, purity and Brewster, fighters that are miles below that level.

Don't tell him that, it makes it easier to distinguish the idiots.

[dan_cov]

Well the fact your boy didn't win a major title till his 49th fight, while Larry did it in his 28th and went undefeated till the time your boy won one going 48-0 before losing a unanimous decision to Spinks.

Does the WBO not count as a major title? and whilst he did go undefeated I am sure we can agree there are quite a few guys who was very raw or past it at the time he faced them.

I think its close I really do.

[D-MiZe]

Does the WBO not count as a major title? and whilst he did go undefeated I am sure we can agree there are quite a few guys who was very raw or past it at the time he faced them.

I think its close I really do.

Not until 2004.

Draw up each fighter's best 5 wins respectively.

[Daddy T]

Does the WBO not count as a major title? and whilst he did go undefeated I am sure we can agree there are quite a few guys who was very raw or past it at the time he faced them.

I think its close I really do.

I think most will agree on that but i also think most will agree that holmes edges it as it currently stands and that wlad needs to do more yet to over take Larry. He needs wins over the likes of Price and Fury(or the winner of a fight between these two) and maybe if he's the real deal Wilder or somebody else who seperates themselves from the pack ... then we can say he's surpassed holmes. But as it stands I think holmes edges it and I'm confident most experts, part time fans and people without major bias will agree.

[dan_cov]

For Wlad I would probably have to go with...

Byrd
Peter
Haye
Chagaev
Chambers

For Holmes, I'm not so sure. Maybe somebody a bit more qualified could do it?

Norton
Shavers
Cooney
...
...


I don't think the top 5 wins cuts it myself. You have to put the rest of their resume into perspective.

[Simurgh]

I don't know why people always pull the '5 best wins' card or 'best win' card. By that logic Bowe is better than Lennox.

I can't just shut my eye under defeats. Should we declare Mike Tyson's resume the greatest ever and not count his looses. Yes I know Holmes was old, but it was his choice to box till then. (Same as Lennox made a right choice to retire on top). Wlad lost to Ross Puritty when he was 22. Holmes didn't even box professionally until he was 24.

Holmes also had some very bad title defenses. To name a few Mike Weaver (41-18), David Bey (18-11), Ossie Ocasio (23-13).. Wlad would be hanged for fighting such opponents.

Wlad had 25 fights in 24 months, so what the hell number of fights before winning the title has with anything. Holmes was 29 when he won the first title, Wlad was 24...