Do Wlad's 3 defeats hamper his ATG status?

[Weltschmerz]

When you say 'we' are all about facts, you are clearly referring to the tiresome Vitali threads. Don't try to deny that.

Don't refer to my ban, you have been banned ten times. This was my first.

You referred to Vitali. You are that little girl coming back to suck some dick after being gone for a while. You really seem like a *****.

[Weltschmerz]

I'm pretty sure he's just jealous that you have a set and he doesn't hence his desire to kick them :cool9:

Did not you die yet?

[StarshipTrooper]

No, because Wladimir wasn't in his prime yet, he needed a world class trainer like Manny Stewart to help him polish his technique and improve his defense. Lennox has no reasonable excuse, he was KO'd in his prime.

Sorry dude, but when you're 27 years old with 41 pro fights you're in your prime.

[LacedUp]

yea, and ken norton is not in my top 15 wlad is around 20 somewhere right behind norton at this point.


you have to compare the level of competition & not just "what you did in your era" because another guys era might be a lot tougher and rougher then the next guys. tony thompson, chris Arreola, Bermane Stiverne, Odlanier Solis, Tyson Fury, Robert Helenius. are all chubby guys (or even fat) these are all top 10 top 5 heavyweights of today. it's ridiculous and unacceptable. I'm not gonna compare a weak era to a tougher era & say "it's about what you did in your era" do you think wlad could actually do the samething in a era fighting forman? he'd get knocked out too.....so what. he's already been ko'd by purity, sanders & brewster.

but let me break it down for you in another way because you don't get the whole norton & level of competition thing. you don't understand that competition is what makes the fighter as great as he is.......without that (or piss poor comp) its a big hole in any resume..........you don't understand that so i will put it in another way.

ok, so you have wlad in the top 15......


which of these fighters is he greater then?

Joe Louis
Muhammad Ali
Jack Dempsey
Jack Johnson
Rocky Marciano
Evander Holyfield
gorge foreman
larry holmes
joe fraizer
mike tyson
lenoxx lewis
Sonny Liston
ezzard charles
Gene Tunney
sam langford

?

Sorry you lost me when you said "you don't understand that competition is what makes the fighter" - I think you need to revisit my post and see that I agree with you on a lot of things, but I can't justify putting Wlad a dominant champion below Norton.

And also, are you trying to make me out to be a Klitschko fanboy?

[Simurgh]

I won't argue with the fact that it's harder to unify nowadays than it was back then. But that's not really the point, because Holmes wasn't unified champ. He was WBC and then IBF champ when that was made. But he was the TRUE champion. You had to beat Holmes to say you were the true champ. Wlad wasn't really THE champ before he fought Chagaev, or if you're kind, Ibragimov, if you're hard on him, Haye. Regardless of brotherhood, Vitali has been ranked either right below or right above him his entire career. Therefore it's hard to say exactly who is actually the champ. Now we can say it's Wlad, but imagine if they weren't brothers and they never fought.

Holmes lost once to Spinks, when he was totally out of his prime. Yet still managed to come back and beat him imo and go on to fight a further 15 or so years and rack up some good wins. His resume is comparable to Wlad's but still better. Frazier was not third at all, he was numero uno as he beat a somewhat prime Ali and gave Ali his first loss. Even at that time, Frazier was probably seeing the end of his prime.

Frazier might have been blasted by Foreman, but Wlad got blasted by Brewster! Which is worse? Frazier doesn't get the credit he deserves for being an absolutely outstanding fighter.

Holyfield? CW champion, genuine heavyweight champion for years, beating bowe, tyson, douglas, foreman, holmes, Moorer, Mercer etc etc. Probably one of the best resumes of all times in the hw division. Clearly in front of Wlad as well. I don't care about his fighting on for too long, it means nothing to me.

I don't agree with it all, but some good points, mate.

You see it's subjective. You don't care for the loses Holyfield suffered but I do. I would rank him MUCH higher if he retired after Tyson.

As for Holmes again it depends how you rank his opposition. I don't really see the fighter which is significantly better than prime Haye. (of course I don't count Ali. I do Norton but it was very very close fight). I don't care he wasn't in his prime when he lost to Spinks he carried on for 15 years after that fight.

Fraizer was amazing fighter, but still I can't put him above Ali or Foreman overall in his generation.

[LacedUp]

You referred to Vitali. You are that little girl coming back to suck some dick after being gone for a while. You really seem like a *****.

Keep coming with posts that has nothing to do with boxing and all to do with you being totally out of your depth when it comes to this discussion.

[StarshipTrooper]

Well yes since you Klitschko haters always want to keep it about 'facts'. You have no factual evidence for past contenders being stronger than today's.

And you have no factual evidence for current contenders being equal of better than past contenders.

So using your own standards you should keep your pie hole shut since you have no evidence for your claims.

[Weltschmerz]

Keep coming with posts that has nothing to do with boxing and all to do with you being totally out of your depth when it comes to this discussion.

You are officially my biatch
.

[LacedUp]

I don't agree with it all, but some good points, mate.

You see it's subjective. You don't care for the loses Holyfield suffered but I do. I would rank him MUCH higher if he retired after Tyson.

As for Holmes again it depends how you rank his opposition. I don't really see the fighter which is significantly better than prime Haye. (of course I don't count Ali. I do Norton but it was very very close fight). I don't care he wasn't in his prime when he lost to Spinks he carried on for 15 years after that fight.

Fraizer was amazing fighter, but still I can't put him above Ali or Foreman overall in his generation.

Yes, it would be the same if Wlad kept on fighting until he was 50. That wouldn't change the fact that he was a dominant champion in this era would it? Or the fact that Ali kept fighting 7-8 years after he should have stopped doesn't change his status? Or the fact that Joe Louis kept on fighting and losing? this has happened to boxing greats time and time again. It's more the rule than the exception that boxers fight on way too long. It shouldn't take away from the greatness they achieved in their primes. At least not in my opinion.

It's not just about one fight. Holmes' resume is comparable to Wlad's as I said, but he did have his fights with Norton, Shavers, Mercer, Cooney, Berbick, Witherspoon, Bonecrusher etc. Those wins are better than Wlad's wins I'm sorry to say. Haye/Byrd would have been top wins for Holmes too imo, but Holmes has more good wins than Wlad.

[LacedUp]

You are officially my biatch
.

Lol what are you even talking about?