Who has a better resume Holyfield or Klitschko?

[武士道]

Well the 5 people that voted for K2, are probably the same person.

To be fair to them, there isn’t anywhere near the same depth at HW today as there was in Holyfield’s era, so you can't really argue resumes - who can they fight today?

[wazaa.]

Provide a list of both fighers notable wins and accomplishments, otherwise I will consider this a 'bait' thread and it will be deleted. You have approx 10 minutes to comply...

things getting serious here at NSB, .

[WladIsTheChamp]

oh, so now were talking about quality of opposition I see.

and thats the whole point: your record doesnt matter. its who you beat that matters.

Wladimir has accomplished a lot. no doubt about it. but now youre starting to count paper titlists, which is unfair since there are 4+ titles nowadays. If you want to talk about lineal champs, thats fair: but Wladimir has faced none.

best way to do it is to look at who has beaten the most top fighters in the division when each fighter fought them. And Wladimir has beaten plenty!

If you want to, we can do it that way: well judge them by how many top fighters in the division they beat. sound fair?

No we are talking about objective levels of competition, not subjective ones like you are still discussing. Butterbean - has never won even a regional title. I can objectively speak to quality without observing it. If for instance we are talking about a world class athlete versus a regional athlete, I can objectively tell you that a world-class athlete is better, I don't have to look at the regional athelte's competition.

Therefore when we speak of records, they mean certain things in the proper context. So in your ridiculous example of Butterbean having a 62-1 record, to compare him to a world class boxer's record, would be like comparing a 15-0 JV high school football team versus an NFL team that is 6-7. Your comparisson is silly when context is taken into account.

So back to Holyfield vs Wladimir comparison, we are comparing two fighters fighting on the same level in terms of context, both accomplished world champs, unfied, defended multiple times, defeated multiple other world champs. In this context, records are the only way to judge them in an objective manner. Wlad's record of 55-3 is much better than Holyfields' 45-10, no matter how you look at it. If you go even further and take a look at KO%, dominance of wins, number of title defenses, etc. Wlad has a better resume than Holyfield.

[xAUGUSTUSx]

I'm a Klitschko fan but this is no contest. Holyfield fought literally everyone.

[The Surgeon]

Other than this Haye fight which is debatable if its his fault or not, Wlad has taken on all comers so its hard to critisize his resume but the division is and has been weak. Not so with Evander he has the better resume by a mile

[the niggest]

No we are talking about objective levels of competition, not subjective ones like you are still discussing. Butterbean - has never won even a regional title. I can objectively speak to quality without observing it. If for instance we are talking about a world class athlete versus a regional athlete, I can objectively tell you that a world-class athlete is better, I don't have to look at the regional athelte's competition.

Therefore when we speak of records, they mean certain things in the proper context. So in your ridiculous example of Butterbean having a 62-1 record, to compare him to a world class boxer's record, would be like comparing a 15-0 JV high school football team versus an NFL team that is 6-7. Your comparisson is silly when context is taken into account.

So back to Holyfield vs Wladimir comparison, we are comparing two fighters fighting on the same level in terms of context, both accomplished world champs, unfied, defended multiple times, defeated multiple other world champs. In this context, records are the only way to judge them in an objective manner. Wlad's record of 55-3 is much better than Holyfields' 45-10, no matter how you look at it. If you go even further and take a look at KO%, dominance of wins, number of title defenses, etc. Wlad has a better resume than Holyfield.

Name one fighter on the Klit's resume that is as good as Mike Tyson or Rid**** Bowe. Resume is about the level of quality of opposition beat and Holyfields level of opposition is by far better, if you argue against that you don't know **** about boxing.

It doesn't take an expert to know that Mike Tyson is a much better win than Lamon Brewster for example and Rid**** Bowe is a much better win than Arreola.

[Steak]

No we are talking about objective levels of competition, not subjective ones like you are still discussing. Butterbean - has never won even a regional title. I can objectively speak to quality without observing it. If for instance we are talking about a world class athlete versus a regional athlete, I can objectively tell you that a world-class athlete is better, I don't have to look at the regional athelte's competition.

Therefore when we speak of records, they mean certain things in the proper context. So in your ridiculous example of Butterbean having a 62-1 record, to compare him to a world class boxer's record, would be like comparing a 15-0 JV high school football team versus an NFL team that is 6-7. Your comparisson is silly when context is taken into account.

so basically, your greatness is based on beating top opponents. I see.

Football is nothing like boxing. in the NFL all the teams are automatically top level, and are permanent...you wont see a colege team get upgraded to the NFL or anything. in boxing that happens all the time.
I come up with boxing examples and you bring up football? come one...thats irrelevant.
its like comparing apples to orangutans.

So back to Holyfield vs Wladimir comparison, we are comparing two fighters fighting on the same level in terms of context, both accomplished world champs, unfied, defended multiple times, defeated multiple other world champs. In this context, records are the only way to judge them in an objective manner. Wlad's record of 55-3 is much better than Holyfields' 45-10, no matter how you look at it. If you go even further and take a look at KO%, dominance of wins, number of title defenses, etc. Wlad has a better resume than Holyfield.

these are just numbers. these people that comprise Wladimir's 55-3 record...how many of them were top fighters, and not low level ones? same thing goes for Holyfield. you said it yourself: levels of competition count. Wladimir already had 34 fights before facing his first top fighter.

If you want, we can count up the top ten opponents that Wladimir beat, and the top ten guys Holyfield beat, and then compare. sound fair?

[steeluv]

any 90's heavyweight champion has a way better record than any klitscho what a dumb question?

[Sweet Jesus]

Tunney you really need to pick your battles more wisely.

[WladIsTheChamp]

so basically, your greatness is based on beating top opponents. I see.

Football is nothing like boxing. in the NFL all the teams are automatically top level, and are permanent...you wont see a colege team get upgraded to the NFL or anything. in boxing that happens all the time.
I come up with boxing examples and you bring up football? come one...thats irrelevant.
its like comparing apples to orangutans.
these are just numbers. these people that comprise Wladimir's 55-3 record...how many of them were top fighters, and not low level ones? same thing goes for Holyfield. you said it yourself: levels of competition count. Wladimir already had 34 fights before facing his first top fighter.

If you want, we can count up the top ten opponents that Wladimir beat, and the top ten guys Holyfield beat, and then compare. sound fair?

Wlad beat 7 world champs, 4 of whom were undefeated, 4 olympic medalists, 5 of those 7 he beat by KO/TKO, while barely loosing any rounds in the clear UD wins.

Holyfield beat 8 world champs at HW and 3 at CW (not counting since Wlad didn't have the possibility of fighting at weights). Only one of these 8 champs was undefeated and Holyfield only managed to beat 3 out of the 8 world champs by a KO/TKO/TD, the rest of the victories were often times controvertial MDs or UDs.

Very close, slight edge to Holy.

Now if we take losses into account, Wlad is the clear winner.