Most dominant Eastern European?

[WladIsTheChamp]

people love to go to extremes in matchups like Wlad vs Tyson, but in reality it would have been an unpredictable fight. I can definitely see Wladimir being able to push Tyson away on the outside with his jabs and hooks off the jab. I can also see him effectively being able to tie up Tyson...Tyson may have been an inside fighter, but in reality there was a lot of clinching in his fights.

And yet we all know the explosiveness and destruction of Tyson's punches, and Wlad's tenativeness and lack of durability. I think we can all see Wladimir doing great, and then getting smacked and the whole fight changing instantly(not necessarily having Wlad automatically KOed, but I can see him stumbling around the ring for two rounds like a drunken sailor until the fight was stopped).

people underestimate Wladimir's heart, and likewise people underestimate the variety and body punching of Tyson.

because of the natural disadvantages both of them have and the fact that their styles are almost completely opposite, if they fought 10 times, you may as well have flipped a coin ten times to see who would have won.

oh and as for the question, yea, its definitely Wladimir.

Very reasonable post. A lot better than crap like: "Tyson would beat both Klitschkos at the same time." or "Tyson would eat both of the Klitschkos and their children."

The sad thing is that the Klitschkos haters are so desperate for the Klitschkos to get beaten that they have to resort to fantasy match-ups to do it or to say that the whole division is terrible because they know no man alive can beat either Klitschko in a boxing ring today.

[razor.thin]

youre living in your teletubie dreamland

you are the one in dream land.

mike tyson is overrated as ****.

[Joeyzagz]

Oh ok, so he has been KOd three times, but only has 2KD? Don't you have to be on the canvas for at least 10 seconds to get KOd? Oh, I get it, you are not counting Williams, but you are counting every single time YOU think Wlad was down. Something is wrong with your math. As I said before, Wlad has not been down 11 times as you say.

Tyson was KOd 3 times, one time by a guy with less power than Byrd, Wlad has never been KOd. That kind puts things in perspective for you.

Tyson built his name on the McNeelies and LHWs of the world, when faced with anyone in his era that was a good fighter and wasn't intimidated, he folded. In all honesty, Tyson is a top 15 HW fighter of all time, Wlad is a top-10 fighter, very closely approaching top 5.

I clearly said First 54 fights In that span Wlad was down 11 times(meaning the ref showed him fingers 11 times) and Tyson was down only twice.

The reason I stopped at 54 fights was because Tyson was over 35 when he was ko'd by Lennox. We cant really compare Wlad to that part of Tysons career until Wlad gets a little older.

But as of now Wladimir's resume' is garbage and none of his opponents were ever accused of being an atg, or even having the potential to be one. All of Wlads losses came against the trash of the superior heavyweight era: A streaking Brewster, a 37 year old golfer and a 20 loss journeyman. His best wins are against a supermiddleweight and a one-dimensional slow Nigerian.

Wlad doesnt even break the top 15. Maybe if he went undefeated he couldve gotten into the top 10, but poor opposition would prevent him from touching Marciano who had 4 ATGs on his resume'. Wlad will be remembered for the weak era he existed in, and the double digit knockdowns he suffered.

[WladIsTheChamp]

I clearly said First 54 fights In that span Wlad was down 11 times(meaning the ref showed him fingers 11 times) and Tyson was down only twice.

The reason I stopped at 54 fights was because Tyson was over 35 when he was ko'd by Lennox. We cant really compare Wlad to that part of Tysons career until Wlad gets a little older.

But as of now Wladimir's resume' is garbage and none of his opponents were ever accused of being an atg, or even having the potential to be one. All of Wlads losses came against the trash of the superior heavyweight era: A streaking Brewster, a 37 year old golfer and a 20 loss journeyman. His best wins are against a supermiddleweight and a one-dimensional slow Nigerian.

Wlad doesnt even break the top 15. Maybe if he went undefeated he couldve gotten into the top 10, but poor opposition would prevent him from touching Marciano who had 4 ATGs on his resume'. Wlad will be remembered for the weak era he existed in, and the double digit knockdowns he suffered.

LOL at your post. ATG monickers have been thrown around by US historians, it's a very subjective measure, if you take a look at any objective measure of Wlad's record and compare it to any HW "ATG" in the top 10 he will be in at least the top 5.

Wlad never fought a supermiddleweight (unless you are talking about a natural HW Byrd who had to starve himself and come down to LHW after his career was done, loosing badly and proving that he is truly a HW, at the very least a CW) or anyone who campaigned at that weight but Tyson's claim to fame is beating a LHW in Spinks, who fought his whole prime as a LHW at 168-172 and only came to HW for 5 fights at the end of his career. Or how about Muhammed Ali - he was beating up on 177 pounders and 180 pounders for half his career. I digress though, let's just stick with Tyson.

Wlad already had 18 title fights and 13 title defenses and he is still fighting, Tyson had 16 title fights and 10 title defenses and he is done, his stats aren't going to get any better. Wladimir has beaten 8 world champions (major belts; IBF, WBO, WBC, WBA) and Tyson beat 5, one of them being a LHW champion. Wlad's KO% 84, Tyson 75%. Out of the champs that Tyson beat only Holmes and Spinks stand out, one was a LHW and the other was 39-years old, clearly past his prime. Tyson had 3 KOs losses, 2 TKOs, and 1 DQ, where he would have gotten KOd if he didn't resort to biting Holy's ear off. Wlad tasted defeat only 3 times. It's clear that Wlad is better in every category, oh and the combined win-loss ratio all of Wlad's opponents is better than that of Tyson's.

Wlad is better than Tyson, by every objective measure. Maybe biased nostalgic old farts like Bert Sugar will call this a weak era, but that's only because the US fighters are not dominating, so you all have to make excuses for it that your top fighters are playing golf or poker or something.

[The_Demon]

Only two fighters from the list are 'dominant',and thats in a piss poor division

[boxasmash]

Wrong........

[boxasmash]

I should add Andres Kotelnik.