Comments Thread For: Bryant Jennings: The Klitschko Brothers Are Not Gods!

[Ravens Fan]

Well an ATG must consist of a couple of things. First off, signature fights. All ATGs have them. Liston has Patterson, Ali has Liston/Frazier/Foreman, Lennox has Tyson, Holyfield has Bowe, Foreman has Moorer/Frazier/Norton, Dempsey has Willard, Marciano has Walcott/Charles/Moore etc etc. Who are the klitschko's signature fight? Where they beat the man who beat the man. Secondly, domination - both Klitschko's have that, not going to argue there. Thirdly, having another ATG or at least a HOF on their record. The klitschko's don't have that either.

Let me see if I understand. All the bros would need to be ATGs in your opinion is to have beaten one or two washed up HOF or ATG fighters?

[Huxley]

I agree its an unanswerable question - to me both the Klitschko's are in the top 10 of all time.

H2H they are in my book too. It all depends on how you choose to rate them.

[Huxley]

Same old song and dance. "I'm going to go in with no fear or respect." Several have gone in that way, but not left that way.

Yep. Very brave talk, yet they all get humbled in the ring.

[LacedUp]

I don't know man. Define "top win on a résumé"? Is a top win, a win against a future ATG? That's not fair at all to judge whether a fighter could be great in another era or if he's an ATG. You can only fight who is there, actively in your era. Wlad has fought any and every contender, pretender and prospect there possibly was to fight. He's cleaned out his division over a 4-5 year period..... If you look at his résumé you'll see undefeated fighters.

Lets bring Floyd into the conversation for a second.... Is Floyd an ATG? Could he be competitive in any era? Sure... Just like Wlad. But using your same criteria for Wlad, who is Floyd's top win?? Almost everyone floyd beat has already been beaten before, guys like JMM, DLH... Beating a guy just cause he's a HOFer obviously does not make one ATG, otherwise guys like Sturm is ATG. So why do those "top wins" make him an ATG? They don't. There's obviously more too it..... Something the résumé can't put on display. The skills a guy has, his willingness to fight everyone in his division, longevity of his title reign, etc...

Wlad nor Floyd have ATG RESUMES, but they're still both Going to go down as ATGs. Wlads top wins are all the #1 contenders, mandatory title challengers and other champions he's defeated. Whether you personally consider each one of those guys individually as "top wins" is nothing but opinion. What's fact is he did what he did to all of those guys who were put in front of him and you can't blame him for who there was to fight. And outclassed them so bad That he probably made them look even worse then they were.

Besides, With all that being said...... How can anyone say for sure Ruslan Chagaev or David Haye could or could not beat any of the bums/journeymen/contenders or champhons that Marciano, Louis, etc - fought? You simply can't.

I agree that you can only fight what's in your era, and Wlad has done that. Therefore he can call himself the best of the last and the current era. Now, does being the best of a bad era equal being the best of all times when other fighters have been great in great eras? That's my point. You could argue Wlad would be an ATG H2H fighter. But that's too intricate to break down.

Wlad hasn't had any legendary wins. Would you agree? He has a couple of solid wins like Byrd, Haye etc. but no epic wins. So how could I agree he's the best of all times? He has the potential to be up there, but unfortunately for him he hasn't had the competition to prove it. So you can never say he was the greatest when he didn't beat other great fighters. Sadly for him, the other main man in his era is his brother. If they weren't brothers, and they fought and determined who the best of them are, I would have probably agreed to the winner of that fight deserving a place in the top 10-15 ATG. But as it stands now, and as it looks in the future there's no one for Wlad to show his greatness against.

I'm not Floyd's biggest fan, but I have nothing against him either - but to be frank, his resume ****s all over Wlad's. He's unbeaten and is a champion in 5 weightclasses and has beaten the legitimate, lineal champion a number of times. He has a lot of unbeaten fighters on his record as well. Not unbeaten in the sense that they fought a lot of bums like Wilder for instance, but unbeaten champions. Wlad only has one to my memory and that fight is probably the worst heavyweight championship unification fight of all times. Even worse than Haye-Wlad.

Bottom line is that Wlad is obviously a great fighter, but he hasn't had the chance to showcase his skills against anyone on his level or close to it, so how can we say he's the GOAT or close to that? We can't.

Let me see if I understand. All the bros would need to be ATGs in your opinion is to have beaten one or two washed up HOF or ATG fighters?

No, that's not what i'm saying at all and I don't see how you could take that from my post.

[LacedUp'sDream]

Gods ? Nah. Demi-god,hell yeh.aint no bully or chumpy bastards bad enough to mess with these guys.theyd be p4p top ten in any era.certainly HOF.

Did the Klitschko Brothers refuse to allow Andrew Laced Up to suck them off once ? I can't fathom this guy.he obviously wakes out of bed thinking about them,makes me wonder does he go to bed thinking about them.their is professional help this guy could seek.does nobody care to help him out ?

[King_]

I agree that you can only fight what's in your era, and Wlad has done that. Therefore he can call himself the best of the last and the current era. Now, does being the best of a bad era equal being the best of all times when other fighters have been great in great eras? That's my point. You could argue Wlad would be an ATG H2H fighter. But that's too intricate to break down.

Wlad hasn't had any legendary wins. Would you agree? He has a couple of solid wins like Byrd, Haye etc. but no epic wins. So how could I agree he's the best of all times? He has the potential to be up there, but unfortunately for him he hasn't had the competition to prove it. So you can never say he was the greatest when he didn't beat other great fighters. Sadly for him, the other main man in his era is his brother. If they weren't brothers, and they fought and determined who the best of them are, I would have probably agreed to the winner of that fight deserving a place in the top 10-15 ATG. But as it stands now, and as it looks in the future there's no one for Wlad to show his greatness against.

I'm not Floyd's biggest fan, but I have nothing against him either - but to be frank, his resume ****s all over Wlad's. He's unbeaten and is a champion in 5 weightclasses and has beaten the legitimate, lineal champion a number of times. He has a lot of unbeaten fighters on his record as well. Not unbeaten in the sense that they fought a lot of bums like Wilder for instance, but unbeaten champions. Wlad only has one to my memory and that fight is probably the worst heavyweight championship unification fight of all times. Even worse than Haye-Wlad.

Bottom line is that Wlad is obviously a great fighter, but he hasn't had the chance to showcase his skills against anyone on his level or close to it, so how can we say he's the GOAT or close to that? We can't.



No, that's not what i'm saying at all and I don't see how you could take that from my post.

I agree he hasn't had the chance to showcase his skills against anyone his level... (But again how can you say for certain that those fighters are plain bad and not that Wlad is just that good? How can we know for sure if Haye would or would not beat any of the "legendary" wins on any other ATGS résumé? We don't.) but the original point I was making is due to size ALONE, Wlad would be COMPETITIVe (and possibly win) against just about any ATG HW. Now on top of that, add his athletic ability and excellent boxing skills and SURELY you can say he has at least somewhat of a chance against any ATG? I don't see how you can say otherwise.

I can somewhat understand what you're saying about the "legendary" wins. ATG H2G matchups are all fantasy/opinion anyway..... But all I'm saying is Wlad doesn't have to have Bowes, Tyson's or Lennox Lewis' on his résumé to be able to say he could have a chance against any ATG- you can make the case not based on resume, but because of the size, skill and athletic ability and work ethic/desire to be great, as ive mentioned. Those are some reasons he would be competitive, not his résumé. IMO of course.

The whole win/résumé thing might be more relevant when comparing smaller active and past ATG fighters..... But with a 6'7 behemoth like Wlad Klitschoo, like I said before... He has a CHANCE to be competitive just on size alone.

IMO

[LacedUp]

Gods ? Nah. Demi-god,hell yeh.aint no bully or chumpy bastards bad enough to mess with these guys.theyd be p4p top ten in any era.certainly HOF.

Did the Klitschko Brothers refuse to allow Andrew Laced Up to suck them off once ? I can't fathom this guy.he obviously wakes out of bed thinking about them,makes me wonder does he go to bed thinking about them.their is professional help this guy could seek.does nobody care to help him out ?

Maybe you should seek some grammatical help. Your post makes no sense.

I agree he hasn't had the chance to showcase his skills against anyone his level... (But again how can you say for certain that those fighters are plain bad and not that Wlad is just that good? How can we know for sure if Haye would or would not beat any of the "legendary" wins on any other ATGS résumé? We don't.) but the original point I was making is due to size ALONE, Wlad would be COMPETITIVe (and possibly win) against just about any ATG HW. Now on top of that, add his athletic ability and excellent boxing skills and SURELY you can say he has at least somewhat of a chance against any ATG? I don't see how you can say otherwise.

I can somewhat understand what you're saying about the "legendary" wins. ATG H2G matchups are all fantasy/opinion anyway..... But all I'm saying is Wlad doesn't have to have Bowes, Tyson's or Lennox Lewis' on his résumé to be able to say he could have a chance against any ATG- you can make the case not based on resume, but because of the size, skill and athletic ability and work ethic/desire to be great, as ive mentioned. Those are some reasons he would be competitive, not his résumé. IMO of course.

The whole win/résumé thing might be more relevant when comparing smaller active and past ATG fighters..... But with a 6'7 behemoth like Wlad Klitschoo, like I said before... He has a CHANCE to be competitive just on size alone.

IMO

And that's the whole point. Wlad could potentially be very competitive in any era. I'm not disagreeing with that at all. But he hasn't done it. Others have. That's the difference. He did get ko'd by mediocre fighters and arguably the best he ever faced in Sanders. My point is how can we say he's an ATG based on ifs and could have's? If he was born 10 years earlier he would have had the chance to compete in a legendary era and could have proved he had the talents, determination, skill, chin etc to beat the likes of Holyfield, Tyson, Lennox, Bowe, Ruddock etc. but it never happened. And that's not saying he couldn't. Be he hasn't.

[kromefish]

As Bryant Jennings will probably find out, fear is not the main reason fighters lose to the Klitschkos. This isn't a Mike Tyson situation where most of his early opponents looked scared before the fight even started. The problem with the Klitschkos is their ability to exploit their massive reach advantages. Bottomline - nobody can get inside and land anything meaningful. I hope Bryant Jennings can change this, but I wouldn't bet on it.

[Bigg Rigg]

Bye-Bye Jennings is my boy. Would love to see him fight a Klitschko

[dlee020420]

I don't know man. Define "top win on a résumé"? Is a top win, a win against a future ATG? That's not fair at all to judge whether a fighter could be great in another era or if he's an ATG. You can only fight who is there, actively in your era. Wlad has fought any and every contender, pretender and prospect there possibly was to fight. He's cleaned out his division over a 4-5 year period..... If you look at his résumé you'll see undefeated fighters.

Lets bring Floyd into the conversation for a second.... Is Floyd an ATG? Could he be competitive in any era? Sure... Just like Wlad. But using your same criteria for Wlad, who is Floyd's top win?? Almost everyone floyd beat has already been beaten before, guys like JMM, DLH... Beating a guy just cause he's a HOFer obviously does not make one ATG, otherwise guys like Sturm is ATG. So why do those "top wins" make him an ATG? They don't. There's obviously more too it..... Something the résumé can't put on display. The skills a guy has, his willingness to fight everyone in his division, longevity of his title reign, etc...

Wlad nor Floyd have ATG RESUMES, but they're still both Going to go down as ATGs. Wlads top wins are all the #1 contenders, mandatory title challengers and other champions he's defeated. Whether you personally consider each one of those guys individually as "top wins" is nothing but opinion. What's fact is he did what he did to all of those guys who were put in front of him and you can't blame him for who there was to fight. And outclassed them so bad That he probably made them look even worse then they were.

Besides, With all that being said...... How can anyone say for sure Ruslan Chagaev or David Haye could or could not beat any of the bums/journeymen/contenders or champhons that Marciano, Louis, etc - fought? You simply can't.

This....Great post