Wlad/Chagaev in jeopardy! Chagaev tests positive for Hepatitis B.

[knn]

In case you didn't know, Chagaev suffered a detached retina early in his career and has bad eyesight in the left eye.

As far as I know these are mere rumors.

How smart of you to discredit Liston's wins over top 10 ranked Floyd Patterson, Eddie Machen, Zora Folley, Nino Valdes, Henry Clark, Roy Harris, Wayne Bethea, Johnny Summerlin, Chuck Wepner as sub-200 lbers, despite some of them weighing well above 200 pounds.

What the heck? Floyd Patterson was only > 200 in ONE of 64 fights (200.25 lbs). His average fighting weight is 180 lbs. He started at 160+. Floyd had 14 opponents 200+, of which 6 were bums. Of the remaining 8 he won FOUR (keep in mind that none of these 4 bouts were real heavyweight fights since Patterson himself was allowed to be 190+).

Liston beating a Patterson and making Liston a top guy is NOT A PROOF of how good the division was. It's a proof of how BAD the division was.

And Ali beating the 10 year older Liston (actually 14 year older, since Liston, too, lied about his age) is AGAIN NOT the proof of how good Ali was but of how bad the division was.

As expected, nothing but sour g****s from a Klitschko fan.

Exactly what I claim. Whatever Klitschko does.... nothing compares to the golden 70ies.

An objective fan can tell that men like Joe Frazier, George Foreman, Sonny Liston, Ken Norton had more ability than the likes of Calvin Brock, Tony Thompson, Hasim Rahman.

I completely disagree. Any modern heavyweight would beat every of the names except probably Foreman. Foreman is the only one from your list I consider competitive as heavyweight.

[Dan...]

Wait up, so Rahman beats Ken Norton now?

[Poet682006]

Wait up, so Rahman beats Ken Norton now?

Let's face it: If the Klitschkos were a couple of Abos from Australia these morons would be slamming them and talking about how Valuev is unbeatable.

Poet

[TheGreatA]

• I say "Dogs eat their own vomit"
• And you reply "Oh, no no no. Dogs are man's best friend and dogs descended from wolfs"
• And I have to reply: "Yes, dogs are all of that... AND THEY EAT THEIR OWN VOMIT".

Yes, Archie Moore was all of that... and Ali beat this old welterweight when Archie Moore was nearly 50 years old. That's the Golden age of Boxing.

Basically you have nothing to say. Repeating the same thing over and over.

Yes, Alabama Kid was all of that... and Archie Moore KOed poor Alabama Kid in Alabama Kid's 248th fight. That's also the Golden Age of Boxing.

Can you imagine nowadays heavies having a record consisting of such wins?

Roy Jones and James Toney didn't do too bad.

And when Wladimir was 5 years old he was 30 lbs. Who cares about some amateur bouts? Don't twist things please.
Chris Byrd's median weight of all his fights is 213 lbs.
Alabama kids' median weight is 160. His opponents' approx. 150.
This is the only thing that counts, not birth weights.

You care about the weight a fighter fought at as a teenager so the weight a 20 year old fights at as an amateur should matter as well.

In other words: Lennox was better thus he didn't have to.

Or because he started his career later. When did Lewis retire? At 37 years of age, the same age Holyfield fought Lewis.

Usually "most people" can be translated into "most haters" or "most gloaters".

Most people in this case being doctors and officials who thought Holyfield was risking serious injury in the ring by continuing to fight.

SO WHAT? Weight protects against punches. Williams was maybe overweight but he looked pretty active and effective.

He was a fat slob, albeit a highly entertaining one who struggled with the likes of a 40 year old Matt Skelton who started boxing in his late 30's.

Yes, that _IS_ downgrading. But you went further by 2nd-level-downgrading: By downgrading opponent's opponents.

Atleast I got you to admit that you were downgrading his opposition.

Yeah, let's get back to Ezzard Charles (185) vs Nick Barone (178) (Heavyweight World Title fight 1950) and call it heavyweight. Let's allow Klitschko to beat some 170+ guys to sex up his record.

Now very obviously the average heavyweight have grown in size since those days.

Excluding the Klitschko brothers and the circus act Valuev, the average top ranked heavyweight today weighs around 220-230, with a bit of extra weight on him, and stands around 6'1-6'3. Look at Povetkin, Chagaev, Ibragimov, Peter, Chambers, Arreola, Haye, Ruiz, Boytsov...

Most of these men were "sub-200 lbers" as amateurs in their 20's.

The haters of the current-heavies would run amok.

I stopwatched the fight against Peter. Klitschko clinched HALF AS MUCH AS ALI (in the first 7 rounds of Thrilla in Manilla Ali has done more holding than Klitschko in the entire Sam Peter fight). Let me also add that Klistchko simply wraps his opponent while Ali CHOKES the throat, pushes the HEAD DOWN and INSULTS. Yes, that's dirty.

Never seen Ali choke anyone but he does pull the head down. Thrilla in Manila didn't have much clinching. How many times did you see Ali clinch during the 1960's?

The great Lennox Lewis himself was known for pulling an opponent's neck down and blasting them with the uppercut, which is an even more serious foul than Ali's yet he was never penalized for it.

Not to mention Holyfield's headbutts, Holmes' lacing, Hopkins', well, pretty much everything...

Yes, took Ali 15 rounds of *cough* floating.

Ali made Terrell go into a shell, utterly dominating an opponent who many thought would be his best challenger.

I guess it's not as good as Klitschko's showing against Ibragimov though.

Who cares that the fight was called "heavyweight" back then? They could have called 150 lbs "heavyweight" in the medieval ages. But 150 is 150 and Schmeling vs Joe Louis (192 vs 198) _IS_ a cruiser fights, no matter how it _WAS_ called then.

Cruiser wasn't 200 lbs until a few years ago. It's a bogus division anyway, both Schmeling and Louis fought 200+ lbers and for the most part beat them up very easily.

Roy Jones weighed 193 lbs when he dominated Ruiz to win the heavyweight title, I guess his achievement shouldn't be recognized though since he didn't put on 20-30 lbs of flab.

If you would be completely correct then Ali doesn't have 15 KOs in his entire career but only 11. Because in 4 of the KOs Ali himself was below 200 (while his opponent was > 200) = He was allowed cruiser speed against a heavier opponent. THAT's how featherfisty Ali was: ELEVEN real heavyweight KOs (= comparable KOs to nowadays heavies) IN HIS ENTIRE career. Anyone who claims that Ali would have had any chances against rocksolid chins/defenses of the Klitschko's... needs some serious contemplation.

You're obsessed with the cruiserweight division.

Rock-solid chin of Wladimir Klitschko... That's pretty funny.

Why would Ali need to knock either of them out anyway? Boxing isn't all about KO's, it's about being the better boxer. Ali certainly has them beat in other areas such as speed, footwork, accuracy...

Ranked by whom? By some American journalists? The same kind of journalists who complain about the current heavies and miss the Golden Age of Boxing?

Ranked by the people. Look at the men Byrd knocked out, none of them have a claim to being top 50 let alone top 10.

You try to downgrade Byrd's win over Vitali. Vitali broke his shoulder BECAUSE Byrd was so flexible. Yes, Vitali is said to have had problems already in training, but nevertheless there is no reason to downgrade Byrd's win.

I'm sure Klitschko fans would agree with this.

Hardly proof that Byrd could punch though.

There is no final proof. That's why I wrote "probably". But I trust Foreman on that issue.

I don't. I didn't trust him when he said Audley Harrison would be the undisputed world champion either, or when he said that James Page was the number 1 p4p fighter in the world.

This is the difference between us: I give FACTS. You are downgrading wins and opponents without proof or documentation.

I have proof for everything I've said.

Alone, or not: I have facts, others have opinions. There is no chance that too many opinions will survive in light of counter-facts.

Facts such as:

Foreman was drugged
Liston was a bumbeater
Moore was a welterweight

You can always proof some powerpunching quality with some peak performances or trademark fights. You Youtube link is exactly what I complain about: That noone actually checks the record, instead judges a fighter by a few rounds.

I've seen every filmed fight of Frazier's and believe me, the man could punch. I've also seen Byrd's fights and he is one of the most effective pillow-punchers in boxing history.

[joe strong]

Anyone who knows me will tell you I like to stir the pot & if I offended anyone with my past posts I apologize.Im not racist or sexist but I don't mind a little friendly ribbing.I've disagreed with people on this site & even had some hatemail sent my way for hacking on the klits but I meant no harm & was just having some fun.I don't hate the klits I just like other boxers better that's all.I'm kind of a united nations boxing fan.my alltime favorites come from the us,south Africa,England,Poland.I've always liked maskaev too.too respect everyones opinion even thou sometimes I shake my head with what I read.even Tunney & I have had a few negative back & forth posts but I don't get mad at him I take in good humor.I got to admit thou sometimes I think some of the posters take it too far.again if I have ever offended anyone with my past posts I'm sorry.the only time I ever got mad was reading guys negative posts about certain countries that they have never been too.I've been on 4 continents & 11 countries the last 3 years so that's why I hate reading stuff from guys that don't really know what their talking about because they were never there.I go to Peru & Bolivia in 85 days.

[TheGreatA]

As far as I know these are mere rumors.

They are not.

What the heck? Floyd Patterson was only > 200 in ONE of 64 fights (200.25 lbs). His average fighting weight is 180 lbs. He started at 160+. Floyd had 14 opponents 200+, of which 6 were bums. Of the remaining 8 he won FOUR (keep in mind that none of these 4 bouts were real heavyweight fights since Patterson himself was allowed to be 190+).

Liston beating a Patterson and making Liston a top guy is NOT A PROOF of how good the division was. It's a proof of how BAD the division was.

I never said that Patterson was 200+ lbs. But some of the men that I listed were.

Speed kills, which is why Patterson was able to become a champion despite being under-sized.

His manager Cus D'Amato was also adept at ducking the top men in the division whom Liston beat convincingly.

And Ali beating the 10 year older Liston (actually 14 year older, since Liston, too, lied about his age) is AGAIN NOT the proof of how good Ali was but of how bad the division was.

Vitali couldn't beat an even older Lennox Lewis.
Old man Sanders finished off Wladimir in two.
Vitali himself is nearing 40 and had a 3 year layoff, yet he is at the top.

Liston was so much older than Ali, not because of how old he was, but because of how young Ali was. Wladimir in his early 20's was being knocked around the ring by the likes of Ross Puritty.

I guess this is proof of how bad the division is.

I completely disagree. Any modern heavyweight would beat every of the names except probably Foreman. Foreman is the only one from your list I consider competitive as heavyweight.

It's all speculation. The fact is that they beat more top ranked men in their own time and looked better doing it than today's bunch of heavyweights.

[skullduggery]

o well i didnt wanna see this **** anyway...

[GJC]

Roy Jones and James Toney didn't do too bad.

Isn't that the whole crux of the matter. Toney a pumped up middle/super middle can be competitive in a HW division ten years after his best by putting on 50 lbs.

[Silencers]

This is the AARP, I don't think they have any control outside of the US. And I don't think they conducted the tests themselves, Chagaev tested positive for a hepatitis antigen, supposedly Wlad would have failed the Finnish commission's test as well but he has fought in the US a number of times, Chagaev fought quite a few of his early fights in the US as well.

[RightCross94]

OF COURSE it wasn't one of his biggest wins. Because Archie Moore was a 45 year old welterweight. Actually Archie Moore was older, since he probably lied about his age by making himself 2 or 3 years younger.

You are right, that the correct term shouldn't be "biggest" but something like "mentionworthy". But I have only 500 characters for the sig and I used up all of them.


Sorry, but "Archie Moore" _WILL_ probably be mentioned.


He boxed at 145 and 147. That's welterweight'ish enough. But not only that: Archie Moore's record consists of beating guys who boxed as low as 112lbs! (Alabama Kid). Archie Moore's median opponent was 172lbs.

Can you just IMAGINE the outcry of US fans if Wlad Klitschko would box a near 50-year-old guy who has wins over guys as low as 139lbs (Chuck Vickers), or over guys who boxed as low as 112lbs?


In the 50ies Archie Moore's median fight weight was 180lbs. He would box as a sub-cruiser nowadays. Just tells you how crappy the heavyweight division was.


Willie Pastrano boxed as low as 122 lbs. I see absolutely NO RELEVANCE to anything. The win over Alejandro Lavorante (19-5) is Moore's biggest win in the 1960ies. So what?


First of all, Evan Fields was 37 year old when he lost against Lennox. But more importantly: Lennox was merely 2+ years younger. You try to put an argument against Lewis where there is none.


Again the same story: But this time Lewis WAS EVEN OLDER than Mike Tyson. That Mike Tyson lost against Williams and McBride is based on the fact that both were Tyson's TWO HEAVIEST opponents (Williams: 265, McBride: 271). Tiny Mike couldn't compete with that. I don't buy this "Mike was shot" theory, because it's mainly used when Mike loses or when someone wants to reduce Lennox' achievements. You should rather accept the following statement: Mike is an ATG, but Lennox won because Lennox is a greater ATG.


I don't see how the "beauty of mind" should have anything to do with a career's record. Moreover the win over Golota is not worth much indeed, not because of Golota's mind, but because Golota's level record.


Unsatisfying yes, but gift? The 5 cuts on Vitali's left face were caused by Lennox' punches and because of Vitali's terribly low left hand.


I won't go there, because you try now to downgrade the opponent's opponents. I didn't do that with Ali's opponents' opponents. If I would do it, then Ali would look even worse.


Since when is boxing a "knockdown contest"? Joe Louis won against Baer and Galento. This "knockdown business" is as useless as the "unavenged losses business".

The "90% bums" figure is wrong. Only approx. 7 of 27 title fights were against bummy opponents. The rest were against a median opponent of 52-8 (at bout) & 69-12 (career) which is EXTREMELY good. Joe Louis is an ATG. Not a single chance against modern heavies, but nevertheless an ATG.


So far I didn't see anything convincing. HOWEVER, let me restate, that I am very happy that you try to solve issues by fact exchanges!


The clinching, head-downpushing, insulting _IS_ dirty. Ali has no manners until now. He insults interviewers and obviously finds it funny to smirk like a child.


I urge everyone to watch Ali vs Earnie Terrell (WBA world heavyweight title 1967, Terell at that time 38-4). Ali runs away the whole fight, Terell has no clue what to do: As soon as he comes closer to Ali, Ali clinches, grabs his neck and insults him. Ali lands some weak shots (how could they be strong when he is punching while running backwards?). ANY modern heavy would walk THROUGH Terell. Ali went 15 rounds with him.


Sorry, I don't think that anyone here will ack that Ali had a decent punch.

In his whole career Ali had 15 KOs within 12 rounds against 200+ opponents. That's 48% (15 of 37). That's like Chris Byrd. And that's already including drugged Foreman.


Chris Byrd had 19 KOs against 200+ opponents. Frazier only 10. KOratio of Byrd and Frazier are approx the same (50%). Byrd won 5 world title fights (median opponent at bout 36-5), Frazier 6 (median 39-11).

Byrd's average weight was 213 lbs (median self) vs 225 lbs (median opponents), while Frazier was basically a cruiser beating cruisers: 205 lbs (self) vs 201 (opponents). They are VERY comparable, with Byrd having the better record. Beating Byrd means more than beating Frazier.


Please no examples from Amateur bouts or Olympics.


Who cares that he KOed Chuck Leslie (177 lbs) or Doug Jones (188). I also don't care that Evander Holyfield KOed Rivera (169, 13-3) or Fred Brown (169lbs, 19-37). Meaningless wins for a valid heavyweight comparison.

Frazier's 73% KOrate melts when you delete all the bums and sub-200ers. He had 10 KOs in his whole career (200+ opponents). If you delete bums like Turnbow (8-13) then what stays? In his whole career Frazier had only 4 KOs against better 200+ opponents (better = those who win 75% or more): 2x against Jimmy Ellis who boxed as low as 155, 1x against fatty Buster Mathis and 1x against Chuvalo (Fraziers best KO). Frazier is as overhyped as others in the 70ies.

That Ali had so much problems with Frazier tells more about how limited Ali was, not how good Frazier was. Frazier belongs there where Foreman put him. Having said that: Frazier is more exciting to watch that Ali. I really like Frazier.

dear lord, wtf is wrong with you, every word you type is just utter crap, your fingers should be chopped off