Isn't It About Time The Ring Included Wladimir In Their P4P Top 10?

[Yessum]

king of the clowns. the best hvwt at this time.
but the division....... come on.

ditto.....

[crold1]

i was thinking the same about the HW not being in the p4p...

but check this thread

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=270238

maybe u will change your mind..
I did.

I've thought about this enough...and never seen a heavyweight whose skill set compared to the best Welters, Middles and Lights. Ever.

[squealpiggy]

To me there really isn't any question about this. He is undoubtedly one of the best 10 boxers in the world and has been dominant over 2 fellow belt holders and a top contender within the past 18 months.

I've seen it argued that Wlad shouldn't be on it because he's a heavyweight, or because of the size advantage he has over his opponents. This is inconsistent with the fact that Lennox was included on the list in the past.

Wlad has the best jab in boxing, his technical skills are clear for all to see and in recent years his opposition has been better than that of Cabellero, Calderon and perhaps one or two others on the list.

Is it not time that his abilities and accomplishments were given more credit?

I disagree. The heavyweight division is poor and he really does have that much of a size advantage over everyone he hasn't proven that he could do it, all else being equal. Lennox at least fought some bigger guys and showed he had the intangibles of heart, chin and will to succeed.

Furthermore Wlad's habit of taking 12 rounds to knock out a guy ready to go in three is galling.

[mindreader]

P4P doesn't mean you moved up in weight and was sucessful.

It means no matter what weight you are you your considered the best out of everybody.

[Dambala]

I would change Caballero and Donaire for Dawson and Wlad.

[squealpiggy]

P4P doesn't mean you moved up in weight and was sucessful.

It means no matter what weight you are you your considered the best out of everybody.

I know full well what it means. And if you have a significant size or weight advantage over everyone you face it makes it harder to be recognised as p4p.

[Dan...]

Good thread Clegg.

I definately think Wladimir warrants top 10 p4p status now. I understand the division is a little weak but the dominant nature of his wins and his willingness to take on all the top guys cannot be ignored.

[mellow_mood]

I know full well what it means. And if you have a significant size or weight advantage over everyone you face it makes it harder to be recognised as p4p.

wassup squeal..


do you think thats the reason paul williams is not include it on the list?

[mellow_mood]

plus guess what squeall..

i just talk to GOD!!! he says hi squeal! how u doing?

[Clegg]

king of the clowns. the best hvwt at this time.
but the division....... come on.

ditto.....

Honestly Steelhead, it's only a casual boxing discussion. There really is no need to use 5 separate account to vote 'no', and then have a discussion with yourself

I disagree. The heavyweight division is poor and he really does have that much of a size advantage over everyone he hasn't proven that he could do it, all else being equal. Lennox at least fought some bigger guys and showed he had the intangibles of heart, chin and will to succeed.

Furthermore Wlad's habit of taking 12 rounds to knock out a guy ready to go in three is galling.

Some fair points, but I look at someone like Darchinyan and I find it hard to find areas in which he is superior to Wlad. Maybe in terms of power, but that's about it.

WW is loaded, and Cotto etc. will always face better opposition than Wlad, but you have guys like Caballero who is on the list based upon a win over Molitor. Decent win, but his last 5 wins are not better than Wlad's last 5.

Even though Wlad does have a height and reach advantage, he uses it better than Caballero or Williams, both of whom have struggled against/lost to guys who were big underdogs.

I've thought about this enough...and never seen a heavyweight whose skill set compared to the best Welters, Middles and Lights. Ever.

But if we say that the bigger heavys cannot be rated because of their size giving them too much of an advantage over the smaller heavys, don't the likes of Tyson and Holyfield deserve consideration for having overcome that?