Neither Klit has ever beaten an elite fighter.

[Spray_resistant]

They have beaten some good fighters who because they lost to them look worse than they are and would have been viewed as better if they had not lost.

Regardless of what you think of their comp they beat the best guys available no ducking or excuses.

Its pretty silly to say you have to beat an elite fighter to become elite because then how did the 1st elite fighters become such in the 1st place if they were beating guys who weren't elite yet?

[cupocity303]

Ha,this stuff is hilarious,steelhammer posts the same old pre made bull**** to try and over hype wlad,then he deflects away criticism on to Haye,when were not talking about haye,and not even claiming haye has fought any elite fighter.

both klitschkos have good records,and have fought a few okay opponents,but none ATG,none elite.

Just admit that fact.

Sure the era isnt good,but im sure at some point they could have worked a more appealing contracts(don king always managed to make big heavyweight fights before did he not???) or two and reeled in some bigger names and some better skilled fighters/tougher opponents.

I would have actually given them more credit had they not lost so embarassingly so many times,and if they had fought a toney or a ruiz at points in their careers when they were a stern test.



The thing that really grinds my gears is that the way they have been beat by non elite fighters,while both were fresh/in their prime fighters.

And that both do not entertain and do not inspire anyone to want to be heavyweight champion of the wolrd.

How can you find their styles exciting to watch,its very basic,its very messy and ugly to watch,its extremly frustrating to see these two big giants fighting like cold robots with no gonads!.
When lewis fought with that type of style,he had fight in him,he went for knockouts,he avenged his knockout losses!,he didnt only jab and right hand someone,he didnt clinch and lean as much.

Wlad actually has a devasting uppercut and left hook,but i dont see it much.

Ide be happy with klits. if they let thier hands go more,used better mix of combinations and showed desire to go for knockouts early(as soon as their overmatched opponents cannot land on them/can not hurt them).

EVEN manny steward doesnt really like wlads style that much"no more bull**** decisions" go for the knockout!.

This is a dumb, dishonest post.

The term elite is meaningless, because everybody has their own interpretation of what Elite is, or their own standard. It's all opinion. The only factual way to call someone Elite, is looking at some sort of ranking of the competition champions face. And in that case, The Klitschko's have faced plenty of Top 10.

And then you're gonna knock on them for losing a few times, despite being almost perfect in the ring throughout their careers. So basically, when they're dominating fighters one after the next, it's crap competition, they lose, they lost to crap competition.

But when someone else losses (I.E. Mike Tyson) to a Buster, everybody's got excuses for him. How come Wlad cannot have an excuse for his losses? Maybe he wasn't as good as he is now. I think this is a testament to how good the Klitschko's are. Like with Floyd Mayweather, everybody is waiting for them to slip up and show weaknesses, so they can get dumped on. The standards are higher than with other fighters.

[Jim Jeffries]

The list of heavyweights that beat other prime, elite heavyweights is pretty short.

[cupocity303]

They have beaten some good fighters who because they lost to them look worse than they are and would have been viewed as better if they had not lost.

Regardless of what you think of their comp they beat the best guys available no ducking or excuses.

Its pretty silly to say you have to beat an elite fighter to become elite because then how did the 1st elite fighters become such in the 1st place if they were beating guys who weren't elite yet?

It's a circle jerk. I can spin it and make any "Elite" fighter into a non-elite, on any Heavyweight's resume in recent history. Ibragimov & Chagaev by defintion were elite. Held World Title trinkets and had undefeated records. One of them had to beat a undefeated Valuev at that time to get his trinket. If Ibragimov or Chagaev were simply undefeated green fighters who haven't even stepped up in competition (like Chisora), that would be one thing. But that's not the case.

.

[haverespect]

I respect this post!

I'm no Klit nuthugger Just a guy who loves boxing and imo you can not deny The Klitchkos

They are awesome , completely dominant beaten loads of prospects , champions ect..... They will fight anyone! theY cant help the fact that an ali or frazier wasnt created in there life time.

Pay them their respect cos if you don't your a HATER

Yes, and Elite is a rather vague term, don't you think?

What is Elite? A P4P Top 10? Someone who has won many world titles already?

If that's the case, then we would have to start digging for Former Heavyweight Champions, but they're all Has-been's now aren't they?

If you're a one-division fighter, especially a Heavyweight, you're only gonna fight Top rated Contenders or fellow Title Holder in Unification. Wlad has done both of those.

So what else is there to do? Fight a Multi-Division Champion? Well Thomas Adamek fits that Criteria (WBC Light-Heavy, IBF Cruiser Champ, Heavyweight Contender), but somehow I don't think TS or you will consider that a win over a "Elite".

SO what else is there to do? Ahh, fantasize about Wlad losing to Fighters from the past. Maybe if a Time-Machine gets invented, we can bring some of these old carcass's back to life to fight Wladimir Klitschko.

Until then, Thread Topic Closed.

[Dave Rado]

They have beaten some good fighters who because they lost to them look worse than they are and would have been viewed as better if they had not lost.

Chambers and Byrd are similar to and about as good as Jimmy Young, and Chagaev would have been a top 10 fighter in any era.

Would Frazier ever have become a great fighter if he had fought and lost to Foreman earlier in his career? I doubt it.

And they haven't just beaten everyone they've fought in recent years, they've also won almost every round, and both have among the highest KO ratios in history. Holmes went for long periods of fighting in just as weak a division as this one, but never dominated to anything like the same extent. In fact, the only elite fighter Holmes ever beat was Norton, and Norton wasn't an ATG. Holmes is classed as an ATG because of his quality as a fighter and because of his longevity, not because of who he beat.

That said, I don't see Vitali getting high in the ATG lists. Wlad's resume is far better than Vitali's is, and Wlad has potentially several years left in which to improve it. Plus Wlad is fighting Haye, who for better or worse most people seem to think is a real test for him, so his ATG standing should go up significantly as a result of beating Haye. (If Haye wins, though, Wlad's ATG standing would be dead in the water - but I don't see Haye winning.)

[lefthook2daliva]

I respect this post!

I'm no Klit nuthugger Just a guy who loves boxing and imo you can not deny The Klitchkos

They are awesome , completely dominant beaten loads of prospects , champions ect..... They will fight anyone! theY cant help the fact that an ali or frazier wasnt created in there life time.

Pay them their respect cos if you don't your a HATER

To quote Wesley Snipes in Mo Betta' Blues: "Respect yo' self...".

I agree with the middle portion of your post. Aside from declining to fight one another, the brothers Klit do whatever they can to add luster to their respective HW reigns. If there were an Ali or a Joe Louis, etc. to fight, I'm quite certain they'd be arguing between themselves about who gets to fight him first.

They are dominant, but are they great? It's a fair question and a good (likely endless) argument.

I think that the main point of this thread was to slap around some of the more rabid Klit fans. From what I've seen, that was accomplished.

However, I disagree with your final statement. The word "hate" is way WAY overused on this forum. "Hater" is an idiotic, drooling, mouth-breathing classification used to deride people who usually entertain a mild dislike for a given fighter by the people who are fans of said fighter.

You know a classification that I like? "Drama-Queen". Most of the folks that use the term "hater" or "hata" can be pegged as "drama-queens". Respect is a word used in almost as clueless a fashion.

[haverespect]

I hear you! but when I see senseless childlike put downs of the bros just to wind up a certain mr steelhammer , that to me is hating or perhaps its just clowing.

I agree there is a lack of elite opponents and some well written arguments for both sides, but some peeps hate is that strong they don't acknowledge anything positive about two fighters that deserve major props.

I'm personally a big mike Tyson fan i'd rather watch him than the bros any day , but I have developed a lot of admiration for what they've achieved over the years.

Just like a previous poster said without a crystal ball or time machine we don't know just how great they could be because that level of opponents has simply not being there. What we can do is look at what they have done with what's been available and boy has it been mighty impressive!

Wesley Snipes also said in Passenger 57..... 'Always bet on black' lol!

As you can see I don't take my self too seriously , I just tell it how I see it . i'm nearly 30 yrs old not sure about the drama queen thing.... if I see hate ..I call it and respect to me is if you either acknowledge certain values in something or lack of respect is when you degrade it and through sheer ignorance choose not to recognise any of these values

To quote Wesley Snipes in Mo Betta' Blues: "Respect yo' self...".

I agree with the middle portion of your post. Aside from declining to fight one another, the brothers Klit do whatever they can to add luster to their respective HW reigns. If there were an Ali or a Joe Louis, etc. to fight, I'm quite certain they'd be arguing between themselves about who gets to fight him first.

They are dominant, but are they great? It's a fair question and a good (likely endless) argument.

I think that the main point of this thread was to slap around some of the more rabid Klit fans. From what I've seen, that was accomplished.

However, I disagree with your final statement. The word "hate" is way WAY overused on this forum. "Hater" is an idiotic, drooling, mouth-breathing classification used to deride people who usually entertain a mild dislike for a given fighter by the people who are fans of said fighter.

You know a classification that I like? "Drama-Queen". Most of the folks that use the term "hater" or "hata" can be pegged as "drama-queens". Respect is a word used in almost as clueless a fashion.

[Battle*Hardened]

Exactly. While it's not there fault, it doesn't change things. They have never beeaten an elite fighter. Not even close.

[Fighting Pride]

Neither did Mike Tyson or Larry Holmes