Wladimir Klitschko's Resume

[GeneralZod]

The same people on this are the people who said Lewis was overrated and would never stand a chance against Larry Holmes...
Lewis ducked a prime Holyfield and Tyson aswell...

Do you expect me to take anything serious from the likes of those?

Corrie Sanders and Ross Purrity beat an ATG heavyweight
THEY BOTH BUMS DOE!!

Ali loses to sub par guys like Leon Spinks, Berbick
ALI PAST BEST DOE
DEY REALLY GOOD FIGHTERS DOE!!

Joe Louis losing to Max Schmelling
JOE NOT FOCUSED, SCHMELLING ATG, HOF LEGEND!!

You sir are a complete bias ******, go do one.

Wlad was prime in his losses, not over the hill and those who defeated him did little else notable.

Ali was beyond his best years, that's obvious by looking at him in the Spinks/Berbick fights then the first Frazier or Liston fight.

No one denies that loss, Max found a way to drop Joe and succeeded. Joe just later paid him back ten fold. Max was also an accomplished champion before the the win and it only boosted his career. No one places him at all time top tens though.

There's no reason to be this hostile.

[Simurgh]

Wlad was prime in his losses, not over the hill and those who defeated him did little else notable.

Not even close, not even 50% of his present level. Just no!

[Elroy1]

Well first of all let me say that I don't think VK is a bum. Even if he had a more aggressive style (think Kovalev) and dispatched his opponents quickly the fact of the matter is that the heavyweight division is not very good.

You mention the "States". Interestingly enough my favorite fighters are not from the States. Most come from the eastern block: Lomanchenko, Prodovnikov, GGG, Kovalev or elsewhere Martinez (now retired I hope), Pac, Donaire so that fact the the Ks are Ukrainian has nothing to do with it.

A great era has a couple top quality fighters (HOF and ATG) in their prime at the same time and a lot of quality "B" competition. Today we have one K and we don't even have quality B competition. Now we know that Ks can beat this level - witness VK destruction of Chris Byrd before the shoulder injury. (As a side note VK's rep was hurt by quitting. He should have ran the last 3 rounds, jabbed. He could have lost the last 3 rounds and won the fight.)

The lack of quality opposition is not VK or WKs fault. It just is.

I think the following are better, absolutely better than any heavyweight in the last 10 yrs not named VK, WK or David Haye.
(not in any order, just off the top of my head)

Rid**** Bowe
Evander Holyfield
Lennox Lewis

David Tua
Mike Tyson (past prime but still dangerous)
Shannon Briggs
Razor Ruddock
Tommy Morrison
Ray Mercer
Oliver McCall
Frank Bruno
Old George Foreman
Michel Moorer
Andrew Golata

and the following would probably have swept through every heavyweight not named VK, WK or David Haye.

Chris Byrd
Hasim Rahman
Oleg Maskaev
John Ruiz
Ike Ibeabuchi

It's not WKs fault that there is nobody there and that the few that are think that coming in with 20-30 pounds of fat will help them in a boxing match. The extra weight from fat might help in wrestling (sumo) or in American football but it doesn't help in boxing.

Your last comment I disagree with, their performance against K's would have been less effective had they come in lighter.

Those opponents you listed were very tough HW's, they would have beaten many current and recent fighters. But some would have also lost to them as well.

You already mentioned Haye, Ibragimov, Chagaev, Chambers, Byrd, Povetkin, Pulev, Jennings, Wilder, Fury, Peter, Thompson, Stiverne, Arreola + many others would have competed on an equal footing with the fighters you listed.

There is no superiority between Lennox era and Klitschko era opponents I see in either direction.

Atleast you didn't try to bring up cruiser bums as credible beaters though.

[Elroy1]

The fight game was way different back then. The holding that VK did in the last few fights would have cost him points (if not a DQ). Secondly they trained for endurance and speed not standing up straight and not moving. Foreman was the only one (and yes he did very well).

Arreola would have come in at 205-210, same with Ray Mercer.

For better or worse training has changed - extra weight does not mean being a better boxer. Look how much trouble an older Holyfield gave to a prime Lennox Lewis.

Your not wrong the division has changed! Liston was an unco slow plodder, Frazier could not land a glove on FOREMAN who could barely box let alone on a technical giant. Even if WK stood still and let Frazier whale on him he doesn't have the punch power to hurt him.

Chuvalo was an absolute bum, the Puritty of the 60's, except Chuvalo was tiny, the fact you even try to defend him is proof of how crappy the division was!

The truth is, the golden era, was a very weak era.

There has never been a stronger era than today with the exception maybe of the Lennox era which was comparable.

[Elroy1]

1. Quality of opposition counts. Look at the Lomachenko-Russell fight. If Russell had 10 more wins over mediocre opposition would that make him a better fighter or simply a fighter used to mediocre opposition?

2. Most title fights maybe. And that's a big plus. But see point number 1.

3. Re unifying the division. Dude. That's what separates the fighters from before the 1980s with the present. The split happened in the 1960s but really didn't take root until the 1980s.

Example: When Liston became champion he had already cleared out the division. To get a title shot back then you, for the most part, had to have gone through the gauntlet. Now adays you have a Roy Jones Jr, a Calzaghe, a Mayweather, a Stevenson who has belts but haven't solidified the division. It's a sad state of affairs.

WK and VK beat unbeaten or nearly unbeaten champions, the heaviest opponents on record, former, current and future champs and oppoennts with 10x better records on average than Liston.

Liston fought CW's and bums almost exclusively and when he fought a decent opponent he lost!

You cannot mention quality and tHEN mention Liston! Who had among the WORST quality of opposition!

[Elroy1]

The fact that Alex Leapai just got a title shot tells us all we need to know about the quality of today's heavyweight division.

Yes, the fact that 240lb 30-4 opponent like Leapai gets a title shot is proof.

But 201lb CW 35-14 BUM like London deserved it.

Words cannot describe how biased and ******ed OTNB can be!

[GeneralZod]

Not even close, not even 50% of his present level. Just no!

He had over 40 bouts when he lost to Sanders and Brewster, how long does it take to get to your prime?

[soul_survivor]

Tyson was old and shot, Bowe beat prime Holyfield twice (his only good wins) and he was never REALLY all that good, Foreman was old as methusaleh, Holmes was old as methusaleh, Moorer was nothing special at all yet he beat Holyfield. Holyfield lost to Byrd and Ibragimov, who Wlad beat.

Tyson was neither old nor shot...go back and watch the fights, read up on them, Holy was the one considered old and shot lol

Holy lost to Byrd and Ibragimov when he was 40+ and literally shot.

He had over 40 bouts when he lost to Sanders and Brewster, how long does it take to get to your prime?

you ain't prime till you beat leapai

[beez721]

Tyson was neither old nor shot...go back and watch the fights, read up on them, Holy was the one considered old and shot lol

Holy lost to Byrd and Ibragimov when he was 40+ and literally shot.



you ain't prime till you beat leapai

both were well past it but holy rose to the occasion that night

[The Hammer]

He had over 40 bouts when he lost to Sanders and Brewster, how long does it take to get to your prime?

He hasn't lost in ten years now.