Who was the greatest Heavyweight Post- Ali era?

[MJ223]

You can say that safely about Vitali sir. He's never been down in 45 pro fights.

I was counting RTD's/TKO's the same as KO's..... In each case the fighter can't/won't continue for whatever reason.....

[joseph5620]

The fights would have been competitive, Bruno especially, as both fighters had great power but terrible gastanks and questionable chins.

Bruno wasn't getting knocked out by fighters like Nate Tubbs. You can't rationally compare Bruno to Sanders.

[nomadman]

I agree but Wlad should not have lost to a fighter like Puritty. 21 or not. These are things you have to consider when you're making comparisons to ATG fighters.



If Wlad had lost to a top fighter it would be different.

Of course it detracts from his legacy but not by a massive margin, not when you take into account Wlad's activity level before the fight, his youth, and the manner of the loss (gasout leading to TKO).

Pac lost to some pretty iffy fighters in his early days too. It doesn't automatically condemn you.

[MJ223]

Wlad was 21 when he lost to Purrity, not exactly most fighters' prime years, and certainly not Wlad's. His losses to Sanders and Brewster are far more damaging, legacy wise.

I agree but Wlad should not have lost to a fighter like Puritty. 21 or not. These are things you have to consider when you're making comparisons to ATG fighters.



If Wlad had lost to a top fighter it would be different.

That convo was pretty lengthy u might have caught the end of it but as for this one I was going to be a little more blunt.....

Even though Purrity was ****???

[joseph5620]

I agree. I don't think either were in their prime at all. Lewis was definitely closer to it though.

Strange how the perception before the fight where Holyfield was favoured over Lewis (Lewis is soft, and chinny, inexperienced, etc.) changes in an instant for the rematch.

You're last paragraph is exactly how I remember it.

[joseph5620]

Of course it detracts from his legacy but not by a massive margin, not when you take into account Wlad's activity level before the fight, his youth, and the manner of the loss (gasout leading to TKO).

Pac lost to some pretty iffy fighters in his early days too. It doesn't automatically condemn you.

I pretty much agree. I'm just saying it's a bad loss.

[nomadman]

Bruno wasn't getting knocked out by fighters like Nate Tubbs. You can't rationally compare Bruno to Sanders.

But he didn't get a win over a fighter like Wlad either. Sanders was hot and cold. Some days he could look brilliant, others sluggish and terrible. Bruno could sometimes run hot and cold as well, but not to the extremes like Sanders. For that reason I'd call it a pick'em fight.

[joseph5620]

That convo was pretty lengthy u might have caught the end of it but as for this one I was going to be a little more blunt.....

Even though Purrity was ****???

Yeah I just caught the end of it. Puritty is a bad loss and it's really not debatable.

[MJ223]

Try again.

I think thats kinda unfair.... Everyone knows what happened but it doesn't officially count..... Kinda like May-Judah considering they both won

[nomadman]

That convo was pretty lengthy u might have caught the end of it but as for this one I was going to be a little more blunt.....

Even though Purrity was ****???

Purrity wasn't that great, but he was tough and could punch and didn't get discouraged. That's more or less what won him the fight, like Brewster a few years later. The Brewster fight is way more damaging though because a) Wlad was in his prime and b) it came much sooner in the fight.