What would happen in Wladimir Klitschko would face Ali's opponents NOWADAYS?

[lefthook2daliva]

Ali weighed below 215 pounds for all of his fights before the layoff and many more after 1970 also. One could claim that he should have been fighting at cruiserweight.

Whats your gripe here KNN? That Ali receives too much credit?

Precisely. Most of the upper tier heavyweights were around that size at that time, so what's the point here?

[GJC]

Weight is a MAJOR factor.

Noone talks about ATGs. Noone said that weight makes you an ATG.

And why do you mention Carnera (or in other cases Valuev) as a proof that weight doesn't matter? Carnera/Valuev is the proof that weight DOES matter. They have OK records DESPITE their skills.

So to summarise weight is a factor in a fight when the opponent has little skill?
A glass jaw isn't a factor either if the other guy can't or won't land.

Wlad is a decent fighter in a poor era, build him up if you like, say he'd have a chance against some of the less elite heavys in the past by all means.
The problem is you are over shooting and making yourself look ludicrous.

For my money Vitali is the better fighter out of the 2 brothers and he lost to an awful version of Lewis.

[GJC]

Precisely. Most of the upper tier heavyweights were around that size at that time, so what's the point here?

They would be bigger now with the steroids available?

[lefthook2daliva]

So to summarise weight is a factor in a fight when the opponent has little skill?
A glass jaw isn't a factor either if the other guy can't or won't land.

Wlad is a decent fighter in a poor era, build him up if you like, say he'd have a chance against some of the less elite heavys in the past by all means.
The problem is you are over shooting and making yourself look ludicrous.

For my money Vitali is the better fighter out of the 2 brothers and he lost to an awful version of Lewis.

Well said. As much as I detest Lewis, he did squeek by Vitali whom I consider to be the better of the 2 brothers and probably would have won a rematch in a more convincing fashion.

[knn]

I generally only debate with one alt at a time but i'll humour you.

I thought I am Tunney? Oh wait, wasn't I frankenfrank?

My eyes make me believe that Ibragimov and Chagaev can't fight.

That is also a problems with Ali-fans. They think that boxing should look like in the 70ies. And then they use this "Ali blueprint" to compare it to modern heavies. And then their conclusion is that "they can see it with their own eyes that modern heavies suck" because they "don't fight like Ali's opponents".

Amateur records are all very well but I think the names Audley Harrison and Pete Rademacher (you'll need to look him up) pretty much end that argument as to its relevance.

I agree here, leave amateur records and Olympic records out of the pro boxing records.

Forget age when you learn a little about boxing you'll realise that it is not an exact science.

Of course not. But 50 to 80 fights are VERY representative. You cannot argue against so many fights.

Ali was totally done after the Shavers fight so Berbick, Spinks and Holmes arn't relevant.

How convenient to erase 3 losses off Ali's record. Any more excuses?

Liston would destroy Sultan, Liston was a lot more frightening across the ring than on boxingrec the opposite is true of Ibragimov.

I never saw "Halloween'ishness" on scorecards. It's irrelevant how freakish Liston looked like. What counts is his performance/record at the end of the day. Actually looking NOT frightening and then winning shows more skills than "winning by looking frightening"

[knn]

Wlad is a decent fighter in a poor era

You have no proof that this era is poor. This "broken record" gets lame.

he'd have a chance against some of the less elite heavys in the past by all means.
The problem is you are over shooting and making yourself look ludicrous.

For my money Vitali is the better fighter out of the 2 brothers and he lost to an awful version of Lewis.

You see how it works?

1. Statement without proof: "Vitali is better than Wlad"
2. Statement without proof: "Awful version if Lennox"
3. Side-thought without proof: "Lennox is less than elite fighters in previous eras"
4. Telling a half-truth: "Vitali lost" (although you were the one who accuses me that record don't tell the whole story).
5. Conclusion based on doubtful statements: "Wlad has maybe a chance against non-elite heavies).

Welcome to the world of CLAYtonism.

[Joeyzagz]

You have no proof that this era is poor. This "broken record" gets lame.

This era is absolute garbage compared to 10 years ago. You have a lot of Lennox's leftovers(Tua, Briggs, Grant, Holyfield, Mccall, Rahman) who are still competing today as top contenders, 10-15 years past their prime. Two of Adameks last 4 opponents are against guys LL Ko'd in the 1990's, and Adamek is supposed to be good.

On top of that you have Wlads own trainer admitting that the amateur ranks in the United States are almost non-existant, and the overall quality of Heavyweight has gone down. Instead of boxers you have failed football players going pro and bums like Tony Thompson who took up the sport at age 28.

All 5 of the Klitschko losses occurred in the superior era of boxing. The trash of that superior era was enough to bully Wladimir. And Lennox at his absolute worst was able to overcome Vitali at his absolute best.

All signs point to a garbage era.

[Jim Jeffries]

This era is absolute garbage compared to 10 years ago. You have a lot of Lennox's leftovers(Tua, Briggs, Grant, Holyfield, Mccall, Rahman) who are still competing today as top contenders, 10-15 years past their prime. Two of Adameks last 4 opponents are against guys LL Ko'd in the 1990's, and Adamek is supposed to be good.

On top of that you have Wlads own trainer admitting that the amateur ranks in the United States are almost non-existant, and the overall quality of Heavyweight has gone down. Instead of boxers you have failed football players going pro and bums like Tony Thompson who took up the sport at age 28.

All 5 of the Klitschko losses occurred in the superior era of boxing. The trash of that superior era was enough to bully Wladimir. And Lennox at his absolute worst was able to overcome Vitali at his absolute best.

All signs point to a garbage era.

Sorry but none of those guys are still competing as top contenders. Fighting club fighters does not equal competing as top contenders. Golota was Adamek's first fight at HW and Grant is a step down for him after Arreola. Neither Adamek or Grant are considered top contenders today. Tony Thompson is not a bum. Wlad has improved since those days and the injury prone Vitali was helped by the 4 year rest.

[knn]

This era is absolute garbage compared to 10 years ago. You have a lot of Lennox's leftovers(Tua, Briggs, Grant, Holyfield, Mccall, Rahman) who are still competing today as top contenders

Yeah so? Anyone is free to compete as long as he wants. It's no proof that this era is garbage. Especially since these guys didn't even fight against the Klitschkos, except Rahman (3 years older than Wlad) who was a last-minute replacement for Povetkin.

Two of Adameks last 4 opponents are against guys LL Ko'd in the 1990's, and Adamek is supposed to be good.

Adamek is building his heavyweight way up. No better way than by beating _former_ big names. Just like Larry Holmes beating Ali. Or like Tyson beating Holmes. Or do you claim that Holmes was crap?

On top of that you have Wlads own trainer admitting that the amateur ranks in the United States are almost non-existant

That's because an extensive amateur career is not the way anymore to become a good pro. Wladimir still suffers from the injuries he got as an amateur. It's maybe a mistake to spend too many fights on the amateur heavyweight stage. Pro boxing is so different from the amateurs that it's like 2 sports. Actually when Emmanuel Steward says that years ago many amateurs could turn pro it actually means that the pro boxing level was LOWER (= more amateurish).

and the overall quality of Heavyweight has gone down. Instead of boxers you have failed football players going pro

But how does being a failed football player show that you are bad boxer? How does a failed actor show that he is a bad president?

and bums like Tony Thompson who took up the sport at age 28.

Tony Thompson is HOF material which, I know, you will laugh at but you will remember it when he gets inducted. That you call him bum is purely hate-based.

All 5 of the Klitschko losses occurred in the superior era of boxing. The trash of that superior era was enough to bully Wladimir.

Lamon Brewster was trash from the previous era? Chris Byrd was trash from the previous era? Don't invent stuff. Moreover both guys were beaten by Wladimir Klitschko, about whom this thread is.

With that same logic I can argue that Cooper was trash from the 50ies, yet he could floor Clay in the 60ies. And that proves that Clay was trash. What a nonsense.

And Lennox at his absolute worst was able to overcome Vitali at his absolute best.

Pure speculation that it was Lewis' worst and Vitali's best.

And moreover it's funny when people start to make an argument based on losing to an ATG. It's no shame in losing to Lennox, especially at heavyweight.

[bukakke]

Wladimir goes undefeated.