Better resume Holmes or Wladimir

The Ali win at that stage had no meaning. Ali was coming out of a 2 year retirement and had been shot for a long time before he retired. That's why it was a one-sided beatdown. Ali had nothing left. It was worse than Jones-Calzaghe. i know, but still beats wlad's wins over mormeck, thompson or even wach.

if only ali and norton were on that list holmes would still have a better resume The Ali win at that stage had no meaning. Ali was coming out of a 2 year retirement and had been shot for a long time before he retired. That's why it was a one-sided beatdown. Ali had nothing left. It was worse than Jones-Calzaghe.

holmes and its not even close.

if only ali and norton were on that list holmes would still have a better resume

after winning his first "world" title wlad defended against unranked jefferson who had been ko'd in 2 out of his last 3, unranked shufford, ancient unranked botha, and ancient unranked mercer. his big stepup was against.....jameel mccline oh dear.hbo boxing after dark. undercard of mayweather castillo i think. or mayweather corley.

Norton is easily the trump card for Larry.

I seriously hope you're not a big Hitman fan like I am. He's one of my top 10 AT favorites. Yeah, I'm a Hearns fan.

That has nothing to do with you attempting to rewrite Holmes career with lies. Holmes would not have " faded" against Brewster evn as a fat over 40 version of himself. And don't tell me Wlad was no where near his prime for his losses while bringing up Holmes-Spinks. You have no credibility on this topic. Did you even watched not the second but the first Brewster fight? No lies I said about Holmes, no negative comments I made, don't turn this around. It's not me who is putting Holmes down, but you putting Wlad down. Wlad was nowhere near his prime when he fought Brewster - not a half of a fighter he is today (but he still beat the **** out of him). As for Holmes I made the observation of age nothing else. Your examination of my credibility is not necessary.

And yet when Wlad fights unbeaten, young fighters in their primes they are all bums. Again ANY version of Wlad post brewster goes across Holmes resume with only one questionable fight (and that's tyson). Wlad loosing 3 fights out of 62 and that happening when he was no where near his prime doesn't tell much. Moreover he destroyed Brewster in the rematch (he was destroying him in the first match as well prior he started to fade - not due to punches he received). Holmes lost to spinks at the age wlad is now. This version of wlad would destroy spinks that fought holmes. That has nothing to do with you attempting to rewrite Holmes career with lies. Holmes would not have " faded" against Brewster evn as a fat over 40 version of himself. And don't tell me Wlad was no where near his prime for his losses while bringing up Holmes-Spinks. You have no credibility on this topic.

When did Holmes get the big KO when it mattered>? Always When did Wlad? always. He also lost to bums. and NEVer fought the number 2 guy in his era. its inexcusable. Holmes Very inexcusable. Yeah, lets brothers kill each other. :stupid:

after winning his first "world" title wlad defended against unranked jefferson who had been ko'd in 2 out of his last 3, unranked shufford, ancient unranked botha, and ancient unranked mercer. his big stepup was against.....jameel mccline oh dear.

Cobb. I recommend you stop mentioning this one, because he was absolutely atrocious. The only reason he's notable is because of how badly Holmes beat him. He took such a beating that Howard Cossell quit commentating on boxing matches.

Obviously you just looked at box rec and posted that. Mike Weaver was a hard hitting dangerous heavyweight who knocked out many of the eras top heavyweights includuding Gerrie Coetzee, John Tate(WBA title), and Carl Williams. David Bey was NOT 18-11 when he fought Holmes. He was an unbeaten young fighter who many picked to upset Holmes who was 35 years old and slipping. Ocasio was not 23-13 when he fought Holmes either. He was unbeaten coming off back to back upset wins over top ranked Jimmy Young which put him in position for a title shot. You can't post half truths. And yet when Wlad fights unbeaten, young fighters in their primes they are all bums. Again ANY version of Wlad post brewster goes across Holmes resume with only one questionable fight (and that's tyson). Wlad loosing 3 fights out of 62 and that happening when he was no where near his prime doesn't tell much. Moreover he destroyed Brewster in the rematch (he was destroying him in the first match as well prior he started to fade - not due to punches he received). Holmes lost to spinks at the age wlad is now. This version of wlad would destroy spinks that fought holmes.

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... Obviously you just looked at box rec and posted that. Mike Weaver was a hard hitting dangerous heavyweight who knocked out many of the eras top heavyweights includuding Gerrie Coetzee, John Tate(WBA title), and Carl Williams. David Bey was NOT 18-11 when he fought Holmes. He was an unbeaten young fighter who many picked to upset Holmes who was 35 years old and slipping. Ocasio was not 23-13 when he fought Holmes either. He was unbeaten coming off back to back upset wins over top ranked Jimmy Young which put him in position for a title shot. You can't post half truths.

This thread is a joke? Sure, I think Wlad gets underrated, but **** like this certainly won't help.

All the contrary, I really do think that any version of wlad post brewster fight would go across holmes list of opponents with ease. Only fight in which I don't see wlad as a huge favorite is tyson. yes anything can happen but not very likly. Wlad is not robotic at all. His footwork is amazing for such a big man. Watch some of his last fights. I got impression you don't see wlad much at all. Wlad would not go through a fighter like Witherspoon with "ease." He couldn't do that with Corrie Sanders who was not on Witherspoon's level as a fighter.

If I've missed any, let me know, I'll edit. Could you also say who you voted and maybe a reason why... Holmes and it's not close. Holmes won his first 48 fights and made 20 straight title defenses. He also would have never lost to fighters on the level of Corrie Sanders, Purrity, or Brewster. That alone separates him.

Shavers, Norton, witherspoon, Williams, Cobb. I appreciate your huge love of Wlad, but you cannot honestly believe he would be as dominant against Holmes' resume; and yes he would beat some, but he would definitely have some loses. (anything can happen when heavies throw hands) You had guys that knew how to nullify his strength which is fighting behind the jab. The heavies today do not slip jabs to save their lives ( and Wlads is kinda robotic) All the contrary, I really do think that any version of wlad post brewster fight would go across holmes list of opponents with ease. Only fight in which I don't see wlad as a huge favorite is tyson. yes anything can happen but not very likly. Wlad is not robotic at all. His footwork is amazing for such a big man. Watch some of his last fights. I got impression you don't see wlad much at all.

I was interested to see what people think who is his best win. My opinion on resumes you'll find on the first page. I surely don't think wlad would have more defeats.. This wlad would destroy spinks. Shavers, Norton, witherspoon, Williams, Cobb. I appreciate your huge love of Wlad, but you cannot honestly believe he would be as dominant against Holmes' resume; and yes he would beat some, but he would definitely have some loses. (anything can happen when heavies throw hands) You had guys that knew how to nullify his strength which is fighting behind the jab. The heavies today do not slip jabs to save their lives ( and Wlads is kinda robotic)

I am going resume win or lose, and I wouldn't count the Ali win either if I was going by wins. Holmes' body of fighters are better than Wlad's and I think you know that, not to mention 15 round fights! I think if you put Wlad in with the same fighters his record would be alittle different, and i give the Klit's total credit for doing exactly what they are supposed to do with the fighters available for them to fight...win. I was interested to see what people think who is his best win. My opinion on resumes you'll find on the first page. I surely don't think wlad would have more defeats.. This wlad would destroy spinks.