Better resume Mike Tyson or Wladimir Klitschko?

[////]

The better resume . Who beat the more accomplished competition.

Oh... Then Wlad.

[DreamFighter]

And Klitschko rightfully doesn't get any credit for those below average wins

Literally never heard anyone mention those bums when it comes to klitschko's resume.

they remain some of his best wins.

[_Rexy_]

and haye would have blasted out buster duglas, so what? the haye that fought wlad isn't comparable to the one that fought bellew or thompson.

tyson would prob ktfo of wlad quite easily but the question is about resume. wlad has better resume and was champ for a decade, in a weak era yes but tyson doesn't have a win over a great fighter on his resume either.

aj has better resume than both.

Ironically, Tyson and Haye both KTFO Purity and Brewster.

[champion4ever]

Look at his resume, there's no one in the 90s you'll look back on and say "wow that was a solid win against a rival".

At least Wlad had a few of those.

Also, Wladimir's first loss came in the 1990s against a journeyman by the name of Ross Purrity in 1998 too.

[Boxing Goat]

Wlad has more world title fights than any HW ever, 2nd most wins ever, had the 2nd longest reign ever and was just barely denied regaining his championship against AJ at age 41. Tyson never beat a good fighter in their prime and was a shell of himself against a nobody McBride when he was 38/39

Easily Wlad

[champion4ever]

Tyson never beat a good fighter in their prime

And neither has Wlad need I say more? .

[Boxing Goat]

Ironically, Tyson and Haye both KTFO Purity and Brewster.

Brewster > Buster Douglas

[buge]

Tubbs and Tucker were just as good as Wlad's best wins. (Haye, Povetkin)

Bruno was solid, Ruddock was solid, so was Golota (no contest is BS)

I think that beats Wlads resume, considering the length of his reign, the competition really was very poor on the whole. Brewster I would put in the solid department, along with Peter, Thonpson, and Pulev.

Povetkin and Haye were good fighters, not elite.

It's a shame Joshua, Wilder, and Fury didnt come 5 years earlier. Depending on how those fights went, would've added a lot.

You would consider Joshua & Wilder at the level of Peter & Thompson if they came along during prime Klitschkos era. They would've been good fighters but never champs or considered elite, and wouldn't be considered high quality wins when looking back years later.

[Boxing Goat]

And neither has Wlad need I say more? .

You should either rethink that or follow another sport

Byrd
Peter
Chagaev
Povetkin
Pulev

To name a few

[champion4ever]

wtf did I just read.

He happened to fight in the 90s era (well, 95 and beyond) and let's look at the champions during the 90s:

- Foreman
- Holyfield
- Bowe
- Lewis
- Moorer
- Briggs
- Bruno

Tyson fought a total of 2 of those in the 90s and lost one.

It's not the era's fault that Tyson literally only fought bums in the 90s.

Look at his resume, there's no one in the 90s you'll look back on and say "wow that was a solid win against a rival".

At least Wlad had a few of those.

That's why it was the toughest, deepest and most competitive heavyweight division in boxing history outside of the Golden Era of the 1960s and 1970s.

In addition, name me all of the Hall of Famers and All-time Greats that Wlad has fought on his resume? I'll wait. There are none.

Mike Tyson has at least four of them. Which includes: Larry Holmes, Michael Spinks, Evander Holyfield and Lennox Lewis. Now how about Wladimir Klitschko?