Reason's Why Wladimir Klitschko Is Not An ATG

[croz]

The current era is better than many people give credit.

Just go back in time and take a look at Jess Willard's record before he was handed a title shot against an almost 40 year old Johnson.
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hum...0602&cat=boxer
20 wins against nobodies and 3 losses to nobodies and this earns him a title shot? Take a look at the standard of opponents Johnson was fighting prior to that. Right before fighting Willard, Johnson fought a guy with literally ZERO wins and TWO LOSSES.

So then Willard after winning the title against a 40 year old Johnson and holding no other notable wins on his entire record, goes on to get inducted into the HoF. Added to that he often gets put on the short list among Jack Dempsey's most notable wins. Why? The guy was a nobody. The only reason he beat Johnson was because the old man had landed so many punches he started to get tired.

When you compare this era to some of the others in history it really isn't that bad, only problem is the shortage of Americans - which I'm guessing is the main problems most of you people have. The fact that so many of you actually think of ******* as a credible opponent illustrates this bias. A fat out of shape Mexican/American who smack talks gets more credit than a former unified cruiserweight champ and an Olympic gold medalist. Maybe if during that brief period Tyson dominated the HW division, before the real boxers, showed up if he had someone around like Povetkin or Haye to fight his reign wouldn't look so bad. Oh that's right, Tyson actually lost to the puffed up cruiserweight.

[DreamFighter]

The current era is better than many people give credit.

Just go back in time and take a look at Jess Willard's record before he was handed a title shot against an almost 40 year old Johnson.
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hum...0602&cat=boxer
20 wins against nobodies and 3 losses to nobodies and this earns him a title shot? Take a look at the standard of opponents Johnson was fighting prior to that. Right before fighting Willard, Johnson fought a guy with literally ZERO wins and TWO LOSSES.

So then Willard after winning the title against a 40 year old Johnson

Willard never fought a 40 year old Johnson, impossible since JOhnson was in exile at that time.

and JOhnson v Johnson was largely an exhibition fight.

End of credibility, end of argument, no need to read rest of your post.

[DreamFighter]

How many times Spinks (natural light HW) fought at HW before beating Holmes TWICE?!

Spinks is arguably the greatest LHW ever.


I am not sure how you can win an argument claiming he was a nothing, but you are welcome to try.

[DreamFighter]

He is already ATG regardless you admit it or not.

if this was the case, why would you feel the need to write it/highlight/enlarge it in every post you write in this thread? Its as if you are trying to convince yourself that its true.

[DreamFighter]

It's upsetting, isn't it?

A light-heavyweight has a better resume than Wlad, truly depressing.

Joe Louis & Jersey Joe Walcott > Any combination of Wlad's best 2 wins.

I had not actually thought about it like that till today, but its frighteningly indicative of Wlads poor run that its true.

[croz]

Willard never fought a 40 year old Johnson, impossible since JOhnson was in exile at that time.

and Johnson v Johnson was largely an exhibition fight.

End of credibility, end of argument, no need to read rest of your post.

He was 37 or 38 when they fought in Cuba. Thanks for splitting hairs. That was necessary. Also, Johnson vs Johnson? I meant his fight with 0-2 Jack Murray right before the Willard fight.

So I guess roughly half of his career must have been nothing but exhibition fights too? Like when he fought 11-6 Tony Ross. 21-6 Jack Moran. 17-6 Frank Moran. 23-13 Ben Taylor. 1-1 Charles Cutler. 5-3 Bill Lang. 6-3 Joe Jeanette TWICE. 3-1 Billy Dung. To name a few, some of which were actual heavyweight title fights. And people ***** about Wlad fighting undefeated HW prospects. Sweet Jesus.

But I guess those guys with more losses than wins must just have a superior amount of moxie in their blood. BTW, just because they're in black and white it doesn't mean they're actually made out of stone. You know that right?

[LacedUp]

What's your point?

Are you trying to say that means Holmes is shit because he was beaten by a LHW? Just some average Joe LHW too? Against a 36 year old Holmes...




The point isn't so much that he's only fought at heavyweight 6 times, in Holyfield's 7th fight he fought for the undisputed heavyweight title. Who has Haye fought?

Another point in this argument, I guess, is that most people believe Spinks robbed Holmes, not once but twice.

Certainly the second fight was bad.

[DreamFighter]

He was 37 or 38 when they fought in Cuba. Thanks for splitting hairs. That was necessary.

37. thanks for not checking your facts, which was necessary as the gap between post prime and retired.

Wlad=37 post prime

Vit =41 should be retired.

So I guess roughly half of his career must have been nothing but exhibition fights too?

you can gues what you want, but people fought everyone in those days, and losses were the norm on the records of the best.

[ShamrockXpress]

In my opinion I think Wlads dominance is being underrated here, Hopkins middleweight reign is lauded, apart from two naturally smaller fighters moving up, who is there during those 20 defences? Wladimir dominating byrd twice, ibragimov and chagaev is impressive. Coming off there recent form going into the first fight with Peter, that was a very impressive victory. He might be lacking in one huge win, but that isn't the definition of greatness. Is Moorer an ATG for his win over a prime holyfield, Douglas for a win over a prime Tyson. How about schmelings knockout of an undefeated, prime joe Louis, does this make him a top 3 ATG?

[croz]

37. thanks for not checking your facts, which was necessary.

you can gues what you want, but people fought everyone in those days, and losses were the norm on the records of the best.

I said 37-38. You want it down to a tee or something? Because he could have potentially been closer to 38 which is why I gave that range.

How did a guy with two losses to his name "Fight Everyone"
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hum...9289&cat=boxer

How the hell did a guy with only four fights, fight EVERYONE?
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hum...1639&cat=boxer