Comments Thread For: Wladimir Klitschko Quickly Climbing The Post-Ali Charts

[Pin Galarga]

Did you even read the article? Who compared Wlad to Ali?

I read in between the lines and Vitali also took that route. Ali or not, the point is that Wlad is winning with size, condition and his jab/hug tactics. Beside his size, He's average and not compatable to any of the stylist of the sport.
Every tall guy can dunk, but not every tall man can fly and dunk with style and grace.
Is like comparing Shak to Jordan. Shak has dominated more, but not consider above the rest, and that's my main point.

Vitali's input: http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=423057

[Dave Rado]

Very true -- Lennox Lewis for example, was knocked COLD by two journeymen, Hasim Rahman and Oliver McCall. He avenged those losses, but nevertheless they happened.

You're going too far. They were not journeymen. They were legitimate top 10 contenders, and would have been, in any eras. Not great contenders, certainly not elite fighters, but definitely not journeymen.

[ChopperRead]

You're going too far. They were not journeymen. They were legitimate top 10 contenders, and would have been, in any eras. Not great contenders, certainly not elite fighters, but definitely not journeymen.

I'm not as impressed with Rahman as you are. Rahman to me is the journeyman who got lucky, rankings aside. Outside of his somewhat lucky punch on a disinterested Lewis, he hasn't done a whole lot. But "journeyman" isn't to me a huge putdown. Some journeymen can step up and rise to the occasion.

McCall could have been much more without the drugs, that is true.

[Dave Rado]

Wlad is a solid champion, but please, there's no comparason with the Greatest. The ingredient missing is Grace. Wlad is a robot, he wins, but there's no beauty or grace. Is like watching a bulldozer moving dirt. Who cares how much dirt it can move, it's just dirt.

This is boxing, not ballet. Don Curry was a very graceful fighter but turned out not to be a great boxer, and was destroyed in his prime by Honeyghan (who was ugly to watch, but was nevertheless a more effective fighter than Curry); and then by McCallum and Nunn.

Just because you like watching someone and admire their style has nothing whatsoever to do with their ATG status. The Wlad of today is more technically sound than most of the ATGs of the past, and has one of the 3-4 best heavyweight jabs of all time. People who bring up the fighter he was five or more years ago are being as ridiculous as those who judge Pacquiao on his losses to Singsurat and Torrecampo and his draw with Sanchez. He's improved out of all recognition in the last few years, under Steward's tutelage, and is still improving. And whether you like his style or not is irrelevant.

[Dave Rado]

I'm not as impressed with Rahman as you are. Rahman to me is the journeyman who got lucky, rankings aside. Outside of his somewhat lucky punch on a disinterested Lewis, he hasn't done a whole lot. But "journeyman" isn't to me a huge putdown. Some journeymen can step up and rise to the occasion.

McCall could have been much more without the drugs, that is true.

IMO "journeyman" is an over-used word. Willie Limond is a journeyman. Tye Fields is a journeyman. Audley Harrison is a journeyman. Rahman and McCall are not remotely comparable to those sort of fighters (although like them, Audley does have a big punch and can occasionally get surprising wins - but he's still nowhere near their level).

You say Rahman just got lucky, but he beat a reasonable number of fairly good fighters and was rarely an easy win for anyone.

[RimmyDelicious]

People are going way too far with this Ali talk, I can picture Ali laughing and making fun of the Klits if they were around during his time.

It's a good thing for you and a terrible thing for this board that Wlad and Vitali weren't around back then, because they would have ended Ali's career and you and your ilk wouldn't even be on this or any other boxing message boards.

[ChopperRead]

IMO "journeyman" is an over-used word. Willie Limond is a journeyman. Tye Fields is a journeyman. Audley Harrison is a journeyman. Rahman and McCall are not remotely comparable to those sort of fighters (although like them, Audley does have a big punch and can occasionally get surprising wins - but he's still nowhere near their level).

You say Rahman just got lucky, but he beat a reasonable number of fairly good fighters and was rarely an easy win for anyone.

"Journeyman" to me doesn't denote "tomato can," which is where I would put Tye Fields and Audley Harrison. That's a category beneath "journeyman," which is respectable.

Maybe I'm being too hard on Rahman, but I can live with it.

[manute bol]

vitali is better than wlad

[manute bol]

It's a good thing for you and a terrible thing for this board that Wlad and Vitali weren't around back then, because they would have ended Ali's career and you and your ilk wouldn't even be on this or any other boxing message boards.

the same way wlad ended ross purity's career lol

[Pirao]

I read in between the lines and Vitali also took that route. Ali or not, the point is that Wlad is winning with size, condition and his jab/hug tactics. Beside his size, He's average and not compatable to any of the stylist of the sport.
Every tall guy can dunk, but not every tall man can fly and dunk with style and grace.
Is like comparing Shak to Jordan. Shak has dominated more, but not consider above the rest, and that's my main point.

Vitali's input: http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=423057

Style means nothing in ranking a fighter, only his results do.