Ranking Wladimir Klitschko Above Max Schmeling. Can It Be Justified?

[SCtrojansbaby]

You are really overrating how much size matters and starting to sound very,very ******

It is more then size, Wlad is athletically superior in every single way.

[Wild Blue Yonda]

It is more then size, Wlad is athletically superior in every single way.

Too bad it's a Boxing match, not a decathlon.

[The_Demon]

Too bad it's a Boxing match, not a decathlon.

Exactly,the guy seems to miss this point

[NChristo]

I am not one to really rush to Holmes' defense (his title reign doesn't get enough criticism for mine, & unlike Klitschko, he was hardly an upstanding & decent gent), but two things stand out here to distinguish the scenarios of their careers...

1. Holmes didn't drop a fight until he was thirty-six. Klitschko has been sparked by mediocre opponents three or four times to this point.

2. Though they were largely far from great, Holmes' title challengers, on average, were unquestionably better than Klitschko's have been. Sure, you could say Klitschko has more readily accepted the different challenges out there, but the fact also remains Holmes' opponents were better, simply by virtue of the fact Klitschko's era cannot feasibly be any worse than it is.

I'm not rating Wlad up with Holmes yet (won't rate him till retired) and of course Wlad's losses will always cast a nasty shadow over his legacy, I was just pointing out that Wlad will most likely be in the top 10 with most because of his achievements that he should of obtained by the time he retires, although his resume will lack any great great names unfortunately.

[bklynboy]

I'm not rating Wlad up with Holmes yet (won't rate him till retired) and of course Wlad's losses will always cast a nasty shadow over his legacy, I was just pointing out that Wlad will most likely be in the top 10 with most because of his achievements that he should of obtained by the time he retires, although his resume will lack any great great names unfortunately.

I like Wlad. I would have loved to have seen him fight in another era where, although he might have a few more loses, would have had tougher fights, and would have reached his full potential.

I don't think any athlete, or anybody in any discipline for that matter, becomes the best they can be without rising up to challenges.

Now going back to the topic question. Is Wlad's jab good enough to take care of Schmelling and the "lighter" heavyweights of the past? Maybe. But I think that Schmelling would expose Wlad's foot speed and balance, as would Joe Frazier (another "small" heavyweight).

One thing we all forget is that Wlad used to mix it up more. I think both Schmelling and Frazier would have forced Wlad out of his shell and mix it up.
Schmelling would by counter punching and by slipping Wlad's punches. Frazier by his speed and head movement.

At this point we would have seen Wlad's boxing heart. Wlad may very well be a far better boxer than we're seeing at the moment.

[StarshipTrooper]

I like Wlad. I would have loved to have seen him fight in another era where, although he might have a few more loses, would have had tougher fights, and would have reached his full potential.

I don't think any athlete, or anybody in any discipline for that matter, becomes the best they can be without rising up to challenges.

Now going back to the topic question. Is Wlad's jab good enough to take care of Schmelling and the "lighter" heavyweights of the past? Maybe. But I think that Schmelling would expose Wlad's foot speed and balance, as would Joe Frazier (another "small" heavyweight).

One thing we all forget is that Wlad used to mix it up more. I think both Schmelling and Frazier would have forced Wlad out of his shell and mix it up.
Schmelling would by counter punching and by slipping Wlad's punches. Frazier by his speed and head movement.

At this point we would have seen Wlad's boxing heart. Wlad may very well be a far better boxer than we're seeing at the moment.

Then again, Steward has him in a shell for a reason. When he's out of it you get the Purrity, Sanders, and Brewster fights.

Poet

[bklynboy]

Then again, Steward has him in a shell for a reason. When he's out of it you get the Purrity, Sanders, and Brewster fights.

Poet

Exactly. If he can run out of gas as a young man of 28 against Purrity what would happen to him against those "little" heavyweights. I think though that Wladimir could have competed but he might have had to slim down some. Come in at 220 instead of 240+.

He can win against the current crop of heavyweights with his jab, jab, jab and staying tall and I think he can easily beat David Haye.

Still, going back to the topic thread I go back and forth as to how to rank him. I need to see him win against a fast heavyweight for me to think of him as anything else than a TOP 20 heavyweight (and only because he's a title holder for 5 years).

I also think that he's a much better boxer now, if for no reason other than age and experience. I would love to see today's WK take on Baer, Schmelling, Primo Carnera, and Jack Sharkey. Would his jab allow him to win on points. Would he be able to go from a jabber to a brawler and back to a jabber; could he keep his wits about him while he's being smothered; will his chin allow him to stay in the game?

I think he would outbox Carnera and win on points. But Baer, Schmelling and Sharkey? If he wins they would be great fights.

[StarshipTrooper]

Exactly. If he can run out of gas as a young man of 28 against Purrity what would happen to him against those "little" heavyweights. I think though that Wladimir could have competed but he might have had to slim down some. Come in at 220 instead of 240+.

He can win against the current crop of heavyweights with his jab, jab, jab and staying tall and I think he can easily beat David Haye.

Still, going back to the topic thread I go back and forth as to how to rank him. I need to see him win against a fast heavyweight for me to think of him as anything else than a TOP 20 heavyweight (and only because he's a title holder for 5 years).

I also think that he's a much better boxer now, if for no reason other than age and experience. I would love to see today's WK take on Baer, Schmelling, Primo Carnera, and Jack Sharkey. Would his jab allow him to win on points. Would he be able to go from a jabber to a brawler and back to a jabber; could he keep his wits about him while he's being smothered; will his chin allow him to stay in the game?

I think he would outbox Carnera and win on points. But Baer, Schmelling and Sharkey? If he wins they would be great fights.

I tend to think his current success comes down to two factors: A) Steward changed his style to mask his deficiencies (ie. protect his fragile chin and reduce work rate drastically to keep from gassing), and B) None of the current crop of Heavyweights have any clue about how to deal with an opponent who has a big reach advantage and uses it. Heavies from past eras knew how to deal with that. So much for the myth that today's fighters know SO much more about tactics then those ignorant morons from pre-2000 :rolleyes9:

Poet

[Wild Blue Yonda]

I'm not rating Wlad up with Holmes yet (won't rate him till retired) and of course Wlad's losses will always cast a nasty shadow over his legacy, I was just pointing out that Wlad will most likely be in the top 10 with most because of his achievements that he should of obtained by the time he retires, although his resume will lack any great great names unfortunately.

Fair enough. I'd be disappointed, on both the strength of his resume & his actual head-to-head ability, to see him as a top-10 all-timer for the division in the eyes of most. I can't see that happening for me at this stage, & I wouldn't like it as a majority opinion. At thirty-four, he's proven to me he just isn't that calibre of fighter (No shame in that specifically, of course).

[joseph5620]

When his career is over I'd gladly rate Wlad higher then Schmeling, Schmeling may have him with a few big names but Wlad's achievements speak for themselves really.

If he keeps this up he should be in the top 10 with most people, people rate Larry Holmes in the top 10 simply because of his title defences and reign so why shouldn't Wlad ?, both were / are in weak eras the difference is that Wlad is taking on the best out there and Holmes didn't.As said "if" he keeps this up he should be in the top 10, I'll rate him when he's retired, he's still got a few good years in him and can't see anyone on the horizon that can beat him apart from "maybe" Haye.

Holmes also never lost to sub par fighters like Brewster, Sanders, and Purrity. With that said I think Wlad has an overall better resume than Schmeling. Outside of beating Louis there are plenty of KO losses and bad fights on Max's resume. You can't pretend those fights never happened because of one fight with Louis. His title reign was very brief and he won it by a foul. I think Schmeling's overall career has been overrated based on his win over Louis in the same way Corrie Sanders overall career is overrated because of his win over Wladimir.