Tweet
the guy is a good fighter, but lately all that talk about him being this dominant force is getting a little overboard. let's break it down
chris byrd: arguably the most talented and witty opponent that klitschko has faced, but way too small. so small that in fact he's confident that he'll be comfortable fighting at 175. no power to present any risk for a big man like klitschko. yet when fighting him, Wlad was overly cautious in the early rounds, and i dont know why
ray mercer: a good name, but ray was way past his prime, fat, slow, and 43 years old. nowhere near the version that showed up against lewis. the result was as expected.
calvin brock: it really gets to me when steward says that Brock was the number 1 heavyweight in America when wlad beat him. can someone please tell me who exactly did brock beat to get a title shot? This is a serious question
samuel peter: a credible win, and a dangerous opponent. at the time with 24 fights without having beat anyone, way too primitive. when such a young and dominant heavyweight cant knockout, let alone decisevly beat a fat james toney it makes you question whether he was such a dominant heavyweight after all. in the first fight james was robbed, second peter won, cleanly. after wlad he definetly improved, but i dont look at him as the best heavyweight, just mediocre. a good win for wlad
ibragimov: a good win, but i never gave sultan a chance in hell to beat wlad, not with the trainer that he had. in fact before the fight, i picked wlad to knock sultan out. had he not been so cautious, he would have finished him easily.
i dont dislike klitschko, i just feel that people give him way too much credit praising him as the best heavy. he is the best and most dominant fighter in this era, and imo he would have given a lot of problems to other great fighters with his physical tools, but his record is deceiving. most people buy into the bull**** that steward says about him, and steward talks alot.
thoughts?
chris byrd: arguably the most talented and witty opponent that klitschko has faced, but way too small. so small that in fact he's confident that he'll be comfortable fighting at 175. no power to present any risk for a big man like klitschko. yet when fighting him, Wlad was overly cautious in the early rounds, and i dont know why
ray mercer: a good name, but ray was way past his prime, fat, slow, and 43 years old. nowhere near the version that showed up against lewis. the result was as expected.
calvin brock: it really gets to me when steward says that Brock was the number 1 heavyweight in America when wlad beat him. can someone please tell me who exactly did brock beat to get a title shot? This is a serious question
samuel peter: a credible win, and a dangerous opponent. at the time with 24 fights without having beat anyone, way too primitive. when such a young and dominant heavyweight cant knockout, let alone decisevly beat a fat james toney it makes you question whether he was such a dominant heavyweight after all. in the first fight james was robbed, second peter won, cleanly. after wlad he definetly improved, but i dont look at him as the best heavyweight, just mediocre. a good win for wlad
ibragimov: a good win, but i never gave sultan a chance in hell to beat wlad, not with the trainer that he had. in fact before the fight, i picked wlad to knock sultan out. had he not been so cautious, he would have finished him easily.
i dont dislike klitschko, i just feel that people give him way too much credit praising him as the best heavy. he is the best and most dominant fighter in this era, and imo he would have given a lot of problems to other great fighters with his physical tools, but his record is deceiving. most people buy into the bull**** that steward says about him, and steward talks alot.
thoughts?
Comment