Klitschkos would be just as dominating in the 60s and 70s

**Sin City** · 08-17-2009, 01:31 PM

lol you're a fool, man.

**Mir-44** · 08-17-2009, 01:33 PM

I AM NOT FOOL!

They are big strong fighter who would stand up against 60s 70s hype.

**Ravishing** · 08-17-2009, 01:34 PM

Originally posted by Hazard

Anyone who disagree is hater and have no sense of reality.

LOL look at your options...smh

No, I don't think they would fare well simply because those Heavyweights FOUGHT. The Klitschkos by far aren't bums, terrible fighters, or anything...but you're talking about guys like Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Norton, and others who were decimating people. You can't compare the quality of opposition guys like Ali and Foreman faced compared to a Sultan Ibrogimov.

**catalinul** · 08-17-2009, 01:34 PM

**** NO.

The'd get slaughterd.

**da chosen 1** · 08-17-2009, 01:38 PM

this guy really sucks, plus the whole heavy weight division suck now

**vercingetorix3** · 08-17-2009, 01:42 PM

I've seen more objectivity on FOX News.

**Jushniy** · 08-17-2009, 01:42 PM

I agree with you. Klitschkos dominate in all ages. They are great boxer and great man.

**bojangles1987** · 08-17-2009, 01:43 PM

Just because of their size they wouldn't suck too bad, but Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Norton, and Holmes would still rule the division.

**Ravishing** · 08-17-2009, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by Jushniy

I agree with you. Klitschkos dominate in all ages. They are great boxer and great man.

Then how did Wlad lose to Corrie Sanders, a part time Pro Golfer???

Klitschkos would be just as dominating in the 60s and 70s