Is Wlad the most.................

[JAB5239]

wlad vs sam peter was really entertaining, i dont think he is boring.
valuev is what i call boring

Wlad-Peter was a decent fight. I also agree about Valuev, but he isn't what I would call a ko puncher.

Wlad is a great ko puncher, but for the life of me I really can't think of any other great puncher who brought less excitement to the table.

[MuckMuck]

Lamon Brewster used the Homer Simpson technique. Remember when Homer became a professional boxer? He let fighters beat on him until they got tired and he simply leaned on them so they would fall. That's exactly what Brewster did in the first Wlad fight. Wlad hammered him for 5 rounds, got tired, and then Brewster finished him off. That's why I never really thought much of Brewster's win. The second fight is exactly what the first fight would have been.

[TheGreatA]

Probably. Here's Ring Magazine's top 50 punchers:

1. Joe Louis
2. Sam Langford
3. Jimmy Wilde
4. Archie Moore
5. Sandy Saddler
6. Stanley Ketchell
7. Jack Dempsey
8. Bob Fitzsimmons
9. George Foreman
10. Earnie Shavers
11. Sugar Ray Robinson
12. Ruben Olivares
13. Wilfredo Gomez
14. Rocky Marciano
15. Sonny Liston
16. Mike Tyson
17. Bob Foster
18. Thomas Hearns
19. Khaosai Galaxy
20. Alexis Arguello
21. Carlos Zarate
22. Max Baer
23. Rocky Graziano
24. Matthew Saad Muhammad
25. Julian Jackson
26. Danny Lopez
27. Gerald McClellan
28. Roberto Duran
29. Rodrigo Valdez
30. Felix Trinidad
31. Pipino Cuevas
32. Jim Jefferies
33. Lennox Lewis
34. Bennie Briscoe
35. Marvin Hagler
36. Edwin Rosario
37. Tommy Ryan
38. John Mugabi
39. Joe Frazier
40. Carlos Monzon
41. Tony Zale
42. Michael Spinks
43. Joe Gans
44. Elmer Ray
45. George Godfrey
46. Naseem Hamed
47. Alfonso Zamora
48. David Tua
49. Cleveland Williams
50. Julio Cesar Chavez

Sandy Saddler could be a bore, Lewis could at times but Wladimir has been the least exciting for the past 3-4 years. I enjoy watching his earlier fights though and appreciate his effectiveness, but fights like Wladimir vs Ibragimov, Chagaev, Rahman aren't ones that I'll be reviewing any time soon.

[Schmerzen]

Wlad-Peter was a decent fight. I also agree about Valuev, but he isn't what I would call a ko puncher.

Wlad is a great ko puncher, but for the life of me I really can't think of any other great puncher who brought less excitement to the table.

i think u have an anversion to east european fighters.
the ppl in usa were used to see black american fighters dominate the division, since tyson&holyfield left, there is not really a great hw from the us.
the other great fighters like floyd get overshadowed by the political movement (pacquiao) of the philippines.
wlad is the best thing happened to boxing, without him the hw division would be even more boring.
it just makes fun to watch him destroy all those big mouth bums, i hope he fights david haye soon, so we can see a fight at eye level.
its funny, back then the government could afford to bann a fighter like ali, i bet today they wouldnt.
im just happy wladimir is not a filipino, they would have make a greek god out of him.

[B.U.R.N.E.R]

I certianly understand what you're saying. Vs Thompson, Brock, Chagaev, Rahman had alot of tentitive moments where he could have pressed the action and didn't. He uses his attributes and doesn't take unessecary risks.

But fighter like Winky or Hopkins are similarily boring, don't end their fights with Brutal Brock or Thompson like KO's yet seem to have no problem getting supporters. They have their "technical" qualities admired not criticized like Volodymyr.

Another thing is people either have short memories or never watched Volodymyr pre-Byrd II. Before hooking up with steward he was exactly what you are saying you wish he was, a destroyer with killer instinct. Watch him vs Mercer, Botha, Jefferson, Barrett. He was aggressive and also was very good fighting on the inside. Watch the Jefferson and Shufford KO's.

I prefer his pre Steward style from an entertainment standpoint but i do think alot of the criticism for his technical style is is hypocritical and over the top from alot of people.

9:10

https://<object width="425" height="...mbed></object>

The big difference with that though is Hops and Winky dont have one punch KO power.

Vitali is exciting.

[BennyST]

I certianly understand what you're saying. Vs Thompson, Brock, Chagaev, Rahman had alot of tentitive moments where he could have pressed the action and didn't. He uses his attributes and doesn't take unessecary risks.

But fighter like Winky or Hopkins are similarily boring, don't end their fights with Brutal Brock or Thompson like KO's yet seem to have no problem getting supporters. They have their "technical" qualities admired not criticized like Volodymyr.

Another thing is people either have short memories or never watched Volodymyr pre-Byrd II. Before hooking up with steward he was exactly what you are saying you wish he was, a destroyer with killer instinct. Watch him vs Mercer, Botha, Jefferson, Barrett. He was aggressive and also was very good fighting on the inside. Watch the Jefferson and Shufford KO's.

I prefer his pre Steward style from an entertainment standpoint but i do think alot of the criticism for his technical style is is hypocritical and over the top from alot of people.

I do agree with you, but I also agree with Jab. I think for a guy that has such power and such a dominant physical presence over his opponents, he fights like someone that is smaller and doesn't have much power at all. It's the kind of thing in which you might ask yourself "Would Malignaggi fight the way he does if he possessed more power than everyone in his division?" I don't know if he would. I doubt it, but even he's been in more exciting fights than Wlad. It's just his style though and he wins very well with it.

The difference between these guys is that Wright and Hopkins didn't have such huge physical advantages nor were they big punchers. In Winky's case, he was very weak in fact but still often got into a brawl and never shied away from a fight. He won his fights with what he had though, and that was a great jab, skills, and little power.

Still, I think, as usual, many people are misconstruing what Jab is trying to ask. He is not saying Wlad is ****. He is saying that for a guy with such incredible power and being the best of his era at HW, is there anyone that knocks his opponents in a more boring fashion? I think it's perfectly valid argument.

When you think of guys with the KO ratio of Wlad, you think of non stop aggressive animals that just wade in and brawl looking for the KO with every shot. Pavlik-esque type fighter or Margarito etc. Wlad is the complete opposite though and if nothing else it makes for an interesting comparison, which was the point of this thread. Stop taking it so personally. Geeeeez...

Anyway, to answer the question Jab....No.

Edit: Just on another point, I think a lot of the criticism on the technical aspect of his game is that while he is a good fighter, he is also very awkward to watch. A guy like Hopkins is beautiful to watch from a purely technical view, even if he is boring. He is like poetry in motion in terms of boxing, whereas Wlad is all flailing limbs and looks uncoordinated, though he isn't of course. That alone, for me anyway, makes him difficult and a bit boring to watch. If I was going to watch a guy for his technical skill it would be someone that was great to watch in his movements, his fluidity, the precision and preciseness of all his movements.

[Schmerzen]

@ BennyST

did u watch lennox vs tua?
lennox was 7" taller and had also big physical advantages over tua, but that didnt stop him from dancing around tua all night.

i dont see users creating threads about how boring LL was.

[BennyST]

Probably. Here's Ring Magazine's top 50 punchers:

1. Joe Louis
2. Sam Langford
3. Jimmy Wilde
4. Archie Moore
5. Sandy Saddler
6. Stanley Ketchell
7. Jack Dempsey
8. Bob Fitzsimmons
9. George Foreman
10. Earnie Shavers
11. Sugar Ray Robinson
12. Ruben Olivares
13. Wilfredo Gomez
14. Rocky Marciano
15. Sonny Liston
16. Mike Tyson
17. Bob Foster
18. Thomas Hearns
19. Khaosai Galaxy
20. Alexis Arguello
21. Carlos Zarate
22. Max Baer
23. Rocky Graziano
24. Matthew Saad Muhammad
25. Julian Jackson
26. Danny Lopez
27. Gerald McClellan
28. Roberto Duran
29. Rodrigo Valdez
30. Felix Trinidad
31. Pipino Cuevas
32. Jim Jefferies
33. Lennox Lewis
34. Bennie Briscoe
35. Marvin Hagler
36. Edwin Rosario
37. Tommy Ryan
38. John Mugabi
39. Joe Frazier
40. Carlos Monzon
41. Tony Zale
42. Michael Spinks
43. Joe Gans
44. Elmer Ray
45. George Godfrey
46. Naseem Hamed
47. Alfonso Zamora
48. David Tua
49. Cleveland Williams
50. Julio Cesar Chavez

Sandy Saddler could be a bore, Lewis could at times but Wladimir has been the least exciting for the past 3-4 years. I enjoy watching his earlier fights though and appreciate his effectiveness, but fights like Wladimir vs Ibragimov, Chagaev, Rahman aren't ones that I'll be reviewing any time soon.

I've always wondered how they work those lists out....Is it just an opinion thing or do they go by numbers somehow. I wonder because I find those lists terrible.

Hearns and Jackson are much too low. I'm not too sure at all about Louis as number one. Then you have guys like Duran, Briscoe, Hagler etc higher than fighters like Trinidad, Rosario, etc and none of them were huge one punch KO artists. Duran at lightweight was a nightmare but a lot of it was still wear-'em-down and then land a big one punch KO or just beat them down with great body punching, amazing stamina and ferocity rather than simple, brute power. Hagler was much the same. He wore fighters down with his hard jab and accurate counter punching and would bust them up then end the fight later. Briscoe was also similar. He would get inside, break a fighter down to the body and then just sit on them until they wore out.

Compare to guys like Trinidad, who would win fights on his power alone. When the power didn't work, he wouldn't always win. Cuevas is another one. If he couldn't **** a guy out and the other fighter could outbox him he would probably lose. Very few were able to take that power though. Man, he had one hell of a left hook!

[TheGreatA]

@ BennyST

did u watch lennox vs tua?
lennox was 7" taller and had also big physical advantages over tua, but that didnt stop him from dancing around tua all night.

i dont see users creating threads about how boring LL was.

Not anymore when he's gone. You don't think Lewis caught criticism from some of his less than exciting performances?

[TheGreatA]

I've always wondered how they work those lists out....Is it just an opinion thing or do they go by numbers somehow. I wonder because I find those lists terrible.

Hearns and Jackson are much too low. I'm not too sure at all about Louis as number one. Then you have guys like Duran, Briscoe, Hagler etc higher than fighters like Trinidad, Rosario, etc and none of them were huge one punch KO artists. Duran at lightweight was a nightmare but a lot of it was still wear-'em-down and then land a big one punch KO or just beat them down with great body punching, amazing stamina and ferocity rather than simple, brute power. Hagler was much the same. He wore fighters down with his hard jab and accurate counter punching and would bust them up then end the fight later. Briscoe was also similar. He would get inside, break a fighter down to the body and then just sit on them until they wore out.

Compare to guys like Trinidad, who would win fights on his power alone. When the power didn't work, he wouldn't always win. Cuevas is another one. If he couldn't **** a guy out and the other fighter could outbox him he would probably lose. Very few were able to take that power though. Man, he had one hell of a left hook!

It's mostly about the quality of opposition that you've knocked out. Raw power, finishing ability and punching technique are of course all things that have been taken into consideration.