What the Klitschko fans predicted years ago turned out to be correct.

[Mr Objecitivity]

Still trying to twist facts to suit your agends i see. Haha whatever Tunney, it's boring, honestly have zero interest in debating with you. I gave you your due attention.

How am I 'twisting facts'? Didn't these things happen or not happen in heavyweight boxing history?

[SinderellaMan]

I watched Wlad's run from 2005-2015
Byrd, Old Rahman, Ray Austin, Wach, Pov, Ibragamov, Calvin Brock, The Samoan Midget (not Tha), Jennings, Sam Peters, Brewster (blind in one eye & inactive for 2 years) rematch, and a whole bunch of others who won't see the HOF. Dominate in an era of subpar talent. When the guys his size & height showed up, it all came crashing down. Great champ who dominated piss poor competition

[The Big Dunn]

They said if Wlad wasn't dominating the B level guys, the B level guys would be at the top of the division, having competitive fights and everyone would be saying how great it is.

This is exactly what's happening right now. The shit has risen to the top. We need a plunger to flush the turds like Wilder.

Wlad is a B+ level fighter that was dominating B, C and D level guys for the most part.

[NEETzsche]

A prime Odlanier Solis got KTFO in one round by a washed up, old Vitali Klitschko.

He didn't get KTFO, he hurt his knee and fell over. It was shaping up to be a competitive fight before that. And Solis was clearly less motivated as a pro than Ortiz has been. Just a case of wasted potential

[Tom Cruise]

Wlad is a B+ level fighter that was dominating B, C and D level guys for the most part.

Wlad was the best fighter in the world for a decade if you ignore mythical P4P. No boxer on the planet could beat Wlad. For 10 years

B+

Dunn, lets not get crazy now.

[The Big Dunn]

Wlad was the best fighter in the world for a decade if you ignore mythical P4P. No boxer on the planet could beat Wlad. For 10 years

B+

Dunn, lets not get crazy now.

He was the best HWT,. Wlad has never been the best fighter on the planet. EVER. His career was longer than those 10 years.

I find it very hard to give an A rating to a fighter that has KO losses to Ross Purrity, Corrie Sanders and Lamon Brewster in his prime.

Wlad clearly was the dominant HWT for a decade. We can't pretend the division was anywhere near its apexes of the early 1970's or the late 1980's.

[Tom Cruise]

He was the best HWT,. Wlad has never been the best fighter on the planet. EVER. His career was longer than those 10 years.

I find it very hard to give an A rating to a fighter that has KO losses to Ross Purrity, Corrie Sanders and Lamon Brewster in his prime.

Wlad clearly was the dominant HWT for a decade. We can't pretend the division was anywhere near its apexes of the early 1970's or the late 1980's.

Well i literally said 'if you ignore mythical P4P'

You dont need a made up ranking system to rate HW's. He was the best on the planet. Point blank period, as you Americans would say. It doesnt need to be comparable to the 70's or 90's for that to be the case. Only a great CW, or maybe a freakish LHW like RJJ could argue that.

What more could he do to be an A level elite fighter? The guy is gonna be a consensus top 15, likely top 10 HW of all time.

[Mr Objecitivity]

He was the best HWT,. Wlad has never been the best fighter on the planet. EVER. His career was longer than those 10 years.

I find it very hard to give an A rating to a fighter that has KO losses to Ross Purrity, Corrie Sanders and Lamon Brewster in his prime.

Wlad clearly was the dominant HWT for a decade. We can't pretend the division was anywhere near its apexes of the early 1970's or the late 1980's.

No other boxer at REAL heavyweight (200+ pounds) has as many fights as Wladimir Klitschko (60+) with as few losses.

No other heavyweight boxer stayed on top as long and dominated the division as Wlad did.

These ACCOMPLISHMENTS deserve an A rating to me.

Losing one or two fights doesn't have greater precedence over a boxer's accomplishments in a span of a decade. That's utterly ridiculous!

And what exactly was so much better about the heavyweight divisions in the 1980's and the 1970's compared to Klitschko's era?

[The Big Dunn]

Well i literally said 'if you ignore mythical P4P'

You dont need a made up ranking system to rate HW's. He was the best on the planet. Point blank period, as you Americans would say. It doesnt need to be comparable to the 70's or 90's for that to be the case. Only a great CW, or maybe a freakish LHW like RJJ could argue that.

What more could he do to be an A level elite fighter? The guy is gonna be a consensus top 15, likely top 10 HW of all time.

We don't disagree he was the best HWT on the planet for a long time. My giving him that ranking is based on his whole career, not just the period where he was at the top. I don't think its fair to leave everything out.

The quality of the division does matter. The reason we respect Ali so much is he was the dominant HWT during an era where the HWT division had a lot of talent. Same way we give Tyson/Holy/Lewis a ton of credit because they were at the top during a time when HWT division was loaded.

My rating was very fair given everything he did. it's not like I said he wasn't a HOF'er .

[The Big Dunn]

No other boxer at REAL heavyweight (200+ pounds) has as many fights as Wladimir Klitschko (60+) with as few losses.

No other heavyweight boxer stayed on top as long and dominated the division as Wlad did.

These ACCOMPLISHMENTS deserve an A rating to me.

Losing one or two fights doesn't have greater precedence over a boxer's accomplishments in a span of a decade. That's utterly ridiculous!

And what exactly was so much better about the heavyweight divisions in the 1980's and the 1970's compared to Klitschko's era?

Ok, I have no problem with that. But what about the prime KO losses? They should also be factored into that rating. Had these KO losses occurred at the end of his career then we'd be on the same page.

See what you did-you made up something I posted and are arguing that instead of my point.

I never posted the KO losses should have "greater precedence over a boxer's accomplishments in a span of a decade." I said they had to be factored in. Your whole record counts, not just the time you were at the top. Right?

IMO those losses knock him down from A to B+. It's not like I said he ****** or wasn't a HOF'er.

The volume of quality fighters makes those eras better. i think its safe to say Ali/Frazier/Foreman/Norton/Shavers/Patterson/Liston and Tyson/Holyfield/Lewis/Bowe/ were better tham the Wlad era.