Comments Thread For: Heavyweight: Four Instead of Two Works Fine

[MrShakeAndBake]

Aside from the four guys mentioned, but particularly Fury and Joshua, it's a very poor heavyweight division. The worst era was the Klitschko's, although Vitali was quite underrated.

There was a period there when Larry Holmes was champion when the contenders weren't top notch, but he was an excellent boxer with a great jab and skill.

The wors was Klitschkos?
Wlad beat the living piss out of multiple unbeaten (not has beens) contenders from africa to new zealand for DECADE, defending them belts for 10 years. Prime Wlad would beat AJ, Fury and Wilder, but for you its somehow is the worst era, ohh ok.

Put Haye, Povetkin, Samuel Peter, Lamon Brewster with anyone of the current tops i guarantee you they would get beat.

Wlad was one of the last greatest. Thats why he is in HOF along with all of the greatest!

[Oldskoolg]

Aside from the four guys mentioned, but particularly Fury and Joshua, it's a very poor heavyweight division. The worst era was the Klitschko's, although Vitali was quite underrated.

There was a period there when Larry Holmes was champion when the contenders weren't top notch, but he was an excellent boxer with a great jab and skill.

Pinklon Thomas, Tim Witherspoon, Mike Weaver, Tony Tubbs, Bonecrusher Smith, Tony Tucker, Tex Cobb, Gerry Cooney etc would have been more than a match for today’s heavyweights. The era was called the “champions for a day” era and they were criticised because they came after Ali/Frazier/foreman etc and were a letdown compared to those fighters but would have been champions and top contenders in this era. Vitali, we never know how good he would be we just know he couldn’t beat a fading Lewis. It’s my opinion he’s better than the lead since wlad was stopped several times and ha duly beaten by Fury so I won’t say vitaly couldn’t have beaten them all but wlad certainly wouldn’t have.
And I noticed you left out wilder purposefully. Clearly you don’t hold him in any esteem but I don’t see any reason not to include him with fury and Joshua especially since Joshua like wilder have both been stopped. And clearly wilder was stopped by someone superior to Ruiz…..

[Robbie Barrett]

This article reads like a biased American desperate for one of his countrymen to be in contention for the HW crown, even when he knows full well Wilder doesn't deserve another shot.

[I have no ears]

The wors was Klitschkos?
Wlad beat the living piss out of multiple unbeaten (not has beens) contenders from africa to new zealand for DECADE, defending them belts for 10 years. Prime Wlad would beat AJ, Fury and Wilder, but for you its somehow is the worst era, ohh ok.

Put Haye, Povetkin, Samuel Peter, Lamon Brewster with anyone of the current tops i guarantee you they would get beat.

Wlad was one of the last greatest. Thats why he is in HOF along with all of the greatest!

He's right, the worst era by far was the Klitschko era, not because they weren't good but because they dominated for years, more so wlad but it was boring and they had a boring style... Haye was an average boxer at best, I don't know how u think he could beat any top heavyweights of this era, there was a reason he pulled out of fighting fury when he was still relevant and ffs povetkin is still in this era, he's been beaten by Joshua, if u mean in his prime then that's very debatable, he got knocked down by David Price a few years ago when he was arguably still at the back end of his prime, and David Price, although not bad technically, he's far from a top heavyweight, Samuel peter and lamon brewster lost to helenius 10 years ago only a year or so after fighting wlad and helenius has proven to be a guy who floats just outside top ten so not sure where you're going with that, all in all your post is utter rubbish and a really bad take

[I have no ears]

This article reads like a biased American desperate for one of his countrymen to be in contention for the HW crown, even when he knows full well Wilder doesn't deserve another shot.

I didn't get that feeling from the article at all tbh, I'm not a wilder fan but he's only lost one fight against the clear top heavyweight of this generation, hardly sounded biased to me

[Robbie Barrett]

I didn't get that feeling from the article at all tbh, I'm not a wilder fan but he's only lost one fight against the clear top heavyweight of this generation, hardly sounded biased to me

Claiming he lost 1 fight is biased. He clearly lost the first one too. So he was defeated twice clearly, no need for a 3rd, only biased fans would say there is.

[Marchegiano]

W Klitschko faced all the top ranked guys that came to him. Please name one that he ducked...no one comes to my mind. Today there are a lot of high ranked guys that risk of not having a single opportunity for a major title. The fact itself that Fury and AJ can't fight is a big difference since that age. And then there are the likes of Joyce Yoka, Ajagba, Hrgovic, even Hunter. Will their time ever come?

Tua, Ruiz, Holy, Tyson, Lennox, Jones, Golota, and Valuev, were all active when Wlad was pissing around with Sanders and Brewster and ****. It's kind of self pleasing to say "that came to him" when the only period he could have gotten some names on his resume people respect today was when Wlad needed to go to them. Which he didn't. Dude's best win is Byrd probably, and I'm not about to talk **** about Byrd, it's a good win, but, some more Byrd level wins would have made the later Mormecks and Pinatas more acceptable.

Wlad did himself no favors by going for the weak belt held by weak champions then fighting the real belt champions long after they'd been dethroned if at all. Rahman in 2000/01ish is a much better win than Rahman in 08. Instead, Rahman got passed around by half that list of names I began with before Wlad fought him.

Sitting on ass waiting for mando while owning what's equal to today's IBO, and picking up losses doing it, is why Wlad has a weak resume. So, you want to talk about risk/reward but that's like the most thought out low-risk reign I know of.

[1hourRun]

Just imagine the further comedy of the WBC trying to explain the need for a bridgerweight division if Wilder and Usyk is the battle for all the belts when the dust clears?

Deontay Wilder is a Olympic medalist, the greatest puncher of all time ; the 'Bronze-Bomber' made a historic WBC title reign. Oleksandr Usyk won Gold at the 20212 London Olympics, Olek, is already a first ballot nominee for the HOF. How does the success at the unlimited weight by these two superb, elite boxers, invalidate the much needed 'Bridgerweight' class?

Deontay Wilder and Oleksandr are special and in a class of their own, dont be shocked when Deontay Wilder knocks-out the Gypsy-Bum and Oleksandr schools A.J.

[champion4ever]

Can't hate on it.

The reason the 90s were what they were was because there were at least 5-6 very competitive heavyweights on the landscape...it was only until after, say, 1999 that Lewis kinda emerged as the defacto "king". Guys like Bowe, Morrison, ****ing Foreman, Vitali, Mercer and Tua were all great fighters and looked (and look) far better than many of the contenders today...most of whom just aren't fighting decent opposition frequently enough to be considered competitive.

Correct and they all fought each other.

[champion4ever]

W Klitschko faced all the top ranked guys that came to him. Please name one that he ducked...no one comes to my mind. Today there are a lot of high ranked guys that risk of not having a single opportunity for a major title. The fact itself that Fury and AJ can't fight is a big difference since that age. And then there are the likes of Joyce Yoka, Ajagba, Hrgovic, even Hunter. Will their time ever come?

All I know is that Wladimir Klitschko fought a lot of mandatory challengers during his reign.