fighters that would beat the Klitchkos

[StarshipTrooper]

Other than those two, the best fighters are Ibragimov

Now THAT'S a ****ing joke :hahahaha9:

Chagaev

No

Thompson

The funniest one yet.....A corpse from the morgue would have more life than Thompson :hahahaha9:

Chambers

A serious stretch

So I don't see it. I expect you to discredit Ibragimov and Chagaev, but they were both undefeated technical guys who held titles and were never in danger of losing a fight going in.

Of course you don't see it: You're a nuthugging idiot.

Poet

[Skittlez]

I find this somehow exaggerated. This is based on 1 fight out of 40. Pre-steward Wlad beat Byrd, Botha, Mercer, McCline among the others...

It's not like Wlad prior to Steward wasn't a great fighter, he just became an extraordinary one with Steward. I remember Manny commented on HBO when Wlad fought Mercer how he is impressed and he said he sees Wlad as an only Lennox's threat.

Wlad that fought Mercer would still dominate this division.

No.. That's stretching it beyond the realms of reality.

This is like saying Steward did a total head job on Wlad and literally mental ***ed him into fighting this way. If Wlad feel secure enough to bomb out this division he would have.

Pre-Steward Wlad would be 5x more exciting but he WILL not dominate this division. His flaws were numerous in that

1- He got serious stamina issues

2-Bad Balance issue

3- Leaves himself open to huge counters when he throws his own combinations

4-He panics when hurt.


Say Emmanuel retired with Lennox. I don't think Wlad gets past Peter..


Plus right now.. in this CURRENT Division we have something Wlad's era from 2006-2011 did not have.
Multiple one punch knock out artists+fighters with KO Power.
Mago-Jennings-Wilder-Price all have that sweet punch.. and Pulev+Fury got good power as well.

Pre-Manny Wlad would have rushed Haye and probably got caught with a huge counter.


I'm not saying Wladimir won't be an Hall of Famer without Emmanuel. I'm saying he won't be a ATG Heavyweight.


Current Wlad= ATG
No Emmanuel Wlad= Very very exciting Hall of Fame fighter just a level beneath ATG Status.

[Simurgh]

No.. That's stretching it beyond the realms of reality.

This is like saying Steward did a total head job on Wlad and literally mental ***ed him into fighting this way. If Wlad feel secure enough to bomb out this division he would have.

Pre-Steward Wlad would be 5x more exciting but he WILL not dominate this division. His flaws were numerous in that

1- He got serious stamina issues

2-Bad Balance issue

3- Leaves himself open to huge counters when he throws his own combinations

4-He panics when hurt.


Say Emmanuel retired with Lennox. I don't think Wlad gets past Peter..


Plus right now.. in this CURRENT Division we have something Wlad's era from 2006-2011 did not have.
Multiple one punch knock out artists+fighters with KO Power.
Mago-Jennings-Wilder-Price all have that sweet punch.. and Pulev+Fury got good power as well.

Pre-Manny Wlad would have rushed Haye and probably got caught with a huge counter.


I'm not saying Wladimir won't be an Hall of Famer without Emmanuel. I'm saying he won't be a ATG Heavyweight.


Current Wlad= ATG
No Emmanuel Wlad= Very very exciting Hall of Fame fighter just a level beneath ATG Status.

Agree with this, but instead no manny-wlad I put prior to Manny Wlad. Just saying that even that level of Wlad would dominate THIS division. He would still beat Haye (actually probably take him out).

Manny did a lot for Wlad. I don't know if Wlad would develop anyway (with some other trainer and more experience). I think not to the level he's now.
Prior to Manny, Wlad wasn't no where near his peak in any sense.

Similar as for Lennox. We don't really know if Lennox would recover after being TKOed. Manny was saying many times how Lennox fully developed only with him and before that he relied too much on his powerful right.

[Cardinal Buck]

Chagaev can get underrated. Solid fighter. Ibragimov was never in danger of losing? The draw with Austin? Ibragimov is evidence of how mediocre a fighter can end up with a belt if enough are around.

You're right, I forgot about that fight (never watched it). Austin was decent for a short stretch though. I did see Iggy's fights with Briggs, Holy, and some am stuff. He was a solid guy. I disagree with saying he was mediocre. In comparison to the previous holders of that belt, he was better than Briggs, Liakovich, and Brewster. You could argue that Brewster was better, but he was really inconsistent and needed a miracle more than once to pull out his fights.

[cupocity303]

i .... yeah I may revise Holyfield up to favourite v the klits.

Ha, I like how you snuck this foolishness in the middle. I may use this strategy myself. I.E. "Of course Ali beats Nikolai Valuev". *A couple of paragraphs later if anyone is still reading, "After careful analysis I'm changing my prediction to Valuev by gorilla attack KO"

Joe Louis... Jack Johnson,Sonny Liston,Muhammed Ali,Larry Holmes,Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis would all beat Vitali and Wladimir imo

Some obviously easier than others ... Tyson,Liston,Lennox and Johnson would ko them the earliest

This assuming they're hands are tied up and they show no resistance?

Louis

No.

Liston

Definitely NO

Ali

Maybe. As in a good possibility.

Foreman

Just a NO

Tyson

A highly likely NO

Lewis

A weak maybe, though leaning in the direction of a weak NO

Red K given for post # 12

wot bout a prime george foreman or prime tyson for Wlad. Im sure there to bound to catch wlad on his weak chin in the early rounds, a prime tysons speed, head movement and pressure is in a different league to any of the opponents that floored Wlad. Also i cant see wlad brawling with lewis the way vitali did, and those uppercuts vitali took would put Wlad away(and thats an old lewis.) boxers for vitali and the ****ers for Wlad, great champions, huge and smart but i think these guys would be too much.

This is like a 'which came first the chicken or the egg' type of situation. Your chicken is that Wlad hasn't faced anything like Tyson, and you cite his losses and wins. And your egg is that an absolute Prime Tyson is too much because he is what? Indestructible? Of course in coming to this conclusion you didn't follow the same standard with Tyson as you did with Wlad, by examining who he fought, won and lost against. You've got to take a look at both guys weaknesses and determine which one is more important.

So what makes you think that prime Tyson is indestructible? His dominating KO wins in his 85-89 prime over journeymen and his best win on paper against a prime Spinks (who is a Light-Heavyweight for all intensive purposes).

If you do a quick empirical analysis, in hindsight, Wlad's KO losses to Brewster and Sanders are less relevant than Tyson's KO losses to Buster and Lennox Lewis - in determining who wins between the two. Stylistically speaking, guys like Buster and Lewis have Tyson's number and there is 1 out of 10 chance that he KO's them if they're on their game; Whereas they have the tools to outbox him and TKO him 9 out 10 times. And this chance increases the longer the fight goes as Tyson wears out. The same goes for Wlad.

Now the only loss on Wlad's record that we may learn something from is the Ross Puritty one. Which is purely about his stamina issues. But he has since corrected that problem in fighting more conservatively and not wasting anything. And Tyson himself still has his own stamina issues that get exposed if he doesn't get his quick highlight reel KO.

Considering the dominance and consistency of a prime Wlad, I will give him the benefit of the doubt in that he won't just be another one of Iron Mike's 1980's type early rounds KO victim , and therefore as he survives the early onslaught of rounds, his chances of executing a Buster Douglas/Lewis type of boxing lesson increases. He has the tools to get it done.

Some I can see beating just Wlad, such as maybe Frazier if he gets inside and connects that left hook enough, and Holyfield I think could beat Wlad.

Unlike Ali, Wlad will not lean against the ropes for defense and do the rope-a-dope. Instead he will lean his full weight on Smokin Joe's 5'11 body. The likelihood of Joe being effective on the inside round after round are small. And him landing that lead hand, left hook from the outside on a 6'6 guy who stands upright is even smaller. All Wlad has to do is take on small step back, and it's just another hit to the shoulder. In the meantime, he is piling up points with his usual Jab and grab, one straight right hand at a time. If Joe gets out with a decision loss, it would be a victory for him.

As for Holyfield, forget about it. Wlad is not an old Foreman, Moorer, undisciplined Rid**** Bowe.

Ali is probably the worst for vitali Ali dominates him Tyrrell style.

Nonsense

POST 36

Green K for best post yet.

Not losing rounds the most of the level of opp is only so impressive. Holmes rarely lost rounds to guys like Peter and Chagaev either. I never said they wouldn't be live against anyone (well, Wlad against Tyson or Louis I feel pretty sure on. Tyson and Louis ate up frightened). Those are just the picks I'd make.

Irrational...LOL.

First it's important to determine which guys on Holmes' record are the equivalent of Peter and Chagaev. This is tricky because it involves objectiveness. I myself would compare them to Norton, whom Holmes struggled with and barely won his Title from. A left over guy from Ali's era. See how that works.

Also Wlad dominating all these guys matters. If his title run simply consisted of Split decision and late come-from-behind knockouts against perceived "bums", then it would be different. But since he is showing his skill in properly dominating them, there is no problem. The only weakness he showed is that YOU MAY KNOCK HIM OUT. You will never decision him by outworking/outboxing him. And the chance of a lucky knockout has even decreased over the years.

Some of these Dreams (posts) are hysterical!!! Fictional writing at its worst!!
To actually consider these two guys in the same discussion with Ali or Holmes or Louis is so silly!!

Oh no!!! Another nostalgic-hysteric, knee-jerk reactionary. Like, "how dare you even debate this. My golden era, hamburger diet tough guys from black and white TV, wipe their ass with your HD TV fighting, better nutrition, taller, heavier, great jab having, modern day bum beating Klitschko's".

Yeah ok. If you think this topic if off limits then don't participate with your kinder garden (or is it Old folks home) rhetoric.

Marciano gets bashed on this site for that exact same reason yet Wlad is a top ten fighter

The difference between the two can be seen on observation. The way they won their fights. With Wlad you can see that he is tall and has Boxing skills that compliment his height. Whereas with Marciano, we see a pudgy looking 5'10 scrapper, who didn't even have the upper body movement or speed of a Tyson, get KO after KO. Yet you conclude that Wlad is the only one winning because he is fighting stiffs. No it's the other way around. A good look at Marciano would tell one that he has nothing in his arsenal/style of fighting that could be effective in other era's. The same cannot be said for 6'6, well conditioned Wlad.

your

You're*

[crold1]

You're right, I forgot about that fight (never watched it). Austin was decent for a short stretch though. I did see Iggy's fights with Briggs, Holy, and some am stuff. He was a solid guy. I disagree with saying he was mediocre. In comparison to the previous holders of that belt, he was better than Briggs, Liakovich, and Brewster. You could argue that Brewster was better, but he was really inconsistent and needed a miracle more than once to pull out his fights.

Austin was never decent. Austin is mediocre on the best day of his life. One of the worst Heavyweights to challenge for a title.

And Brewster was better. Inconsistent...sure. But he beat Wlad by showing the sort of balls Ibragimov left at home for his fight with Klitschko, Golota, Krasniqi and was ALL warrior in losses to Ettienne and Lyakhovich (that being the last truly great Heavyweight fight title anyone seen in recent times).

Ibragimov-Holyfield was close...and that was Holy's corpse. Sorry. Mediocre dude.

[Scott9945]

Austin was never decent. Austin is mediocre on the best day of his life. One of the worst Heavyweights to challenge for a title.

While he wasn't outstanding at anything, there have been plenty of worse heavyweight title challengers than Austin. Joe Roman, Terry Daniels, Scott Frank, and Richard Dunn were all title challengers for future hall of fame champions. None of them would have beaten Ray Austin on their best day.

[Cardinal Buck]

Austin was never decent. Austin is mediocre on the best day of his life. One of the worst Heavyweights to challenge for a title.

And Brewster was better. Inconsistent...sure. But he beat Wlad by showing the sort of balls Ibragimov left at home for his fight with Klitschko, Golota, Krasniqi and was ALL warrior in losses to Ettienne and Lyakhovich (that being the last truly great Heavyweight fight title anyone seen in recent times).

Ibragimov-Holyfield was close...and that was Holy's corpse. Sorry. Mediocre dude.

Ibragimov won by a landslide against Holy and was never in trouble...so I don't know what you're talking about.

Austin was better than Ettiene and at a similar level to Liakovich. Similar fighter in style when you get down to it (Liakovich usually fought as a vulnerable rangy guy with mixed reults...same s hit as Austin).

If you're gonna rate Brewster higher, fine, but that's because he beat Wlad and Iggy stunk it out which defeats the purpose of what we're talking about here. Ibragimov dec Brewster is pretty easily the most likely outcome of that match.

btw I like Brewster more than Ibragimov or Wlad, but he had big limitations.

Also, Ibragimov retired early which is why he has worse resume than some other guys.

[crold1]

Ibragimov won by a landslide against Holy and was never in trouble...so I don't know what you're talking about.

Austin was better than Ettiene and at a similar level to Liakovich. Similar fighter in style when you get down to it (Liakovich usually fought as a vulnerable rangy guy with mixed reults...same s hit as Austin).

If you're gonna rate Brewster higher, fine, but that's because he beat Wlad and Iggy stunk it out which defeats the purpose of what we're talking about here. Ibragimov dec Brewster is pretty easily the most likely outcome of that match.

btw I like Brewster more than Ibragimov or Wlad, but he had big limitations.

Also, Ibragimov retired early which is why he has worse resume than some other guys.

I should have used the word competitive, which it was in spots. It wasn't close. My bad. It was unimpressive.

Ettienne-Austin would have been a good fight. I don't see one being clearly better than the other. I think Lyakhovich would have beat Austin soundly.

And while I accept Brewster had limitations, Ibragimov's gutless display against Wlad and struggles with Austin make Brewster an easy nod there. Brewster was just a better pro and I think he would have beat Ibragimov.

But, like I said, I'll give you Chagaev all day. Solid pro. Not spectacular, but solid.

[crold1]

While he wasn't outstanding at anything, there have been plenty of worse heavyweight title challengers than Austin. Joe Roman, Terry Daniels, Scott Frank, and Richard Dunn were all title challengers for future hall of fame champions. None of them would have beaten Ray Austin on their best day.

I didn't say THE worst. To be fair, he's not even the worst challenger Wlad has faced. Mormeck and Wach were worse. Anyone who starts racking them up at Heavy has some of that though.