Wlad vs actual "old" heavies

[////]

He's always been a passive fighter ever since he reached his prime, his work rate against Haye was abysmal as well. This is the same Wlad we saw years before time and time again.

First 4 rounds he threw 21 power punches total, AJ was toying with him and had him in survival mode. Exploded in the 5th when AJ gassed with 45, then 22, 12, 10, 14, 9.

Wlad had 3 rounds where he was actually aggressive, the 5th when AJ gassed, 6th, and 9th.

Didn't realize who made the thread. Racial thread. Wouldn't have posted.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Not true at all, history has shown fighters are at their most vulnerable their first few years they turn pro. Ward was down against Boone, Stevenson got KO'd by Boone, Kovalev got dropped by Boone, Toney went life and death with Tiberi, Calzaghe down, Wlad out by journeymen, Ali down by Cooper, etc.

History has also shown that a lot of these old fighters you're referring to came in out of shape, Wlad did not.



Using age to gauge how good a fighter is, is ******ed itself.

A fighter's actual physique, their weight, is a reflection of how close they are to their physical primes and if they're actually in shape! Age can't tell you any of that.

Hopkins was able to win a title at 49 because he was in incredible shape and had a wealth of experience.

You forget PRIME Hopkins went life and death with Segundo Mercado, the older version would school him.

Your point is...?????
Your basically trying to say Wlad coming in at a lighter than usual weight against AJ proves he was still in his prime. Well Muhammad Ali came in the lightest he'd been in over 5 years against Larry Holmes, was he still in his prime? NO.
As I said you CANNOT use weight to gauge a fighter's prime therefore this thread is nonsense! 😂😂😂

[FinitoxDinamita]

Pre-Sanders Wlad would have destroyed marciano foreman-FraZier style.

[Mr Objecitivity]

Not true at all, history has shown fighters are at their most vulnerable their first few years they turn pro. Ward was down against Boone, Stevenson got KO'd by Boone, Kovalev got dropped by Boone, Toney went life and death with Tiberi, Calzaghe down, Wlad out by journeymen, Ali down by Cooper, etc.

History has also shown that a lot of these old fighters you're referring to came in out of shape, Wlad did not.



Using age to gauge how good a fighter is, is ******ed itself.

A fighter's actual physique, their weight, is a reflection of how close they are to their physical primes and if they're actually in shape! Age can't tell you any of that.

Hopkins was able to win a title at 49 because he was in incredible shape and had a wealth of experience.

You forget PRIME Hopkins went life and death with Segundo Mercado, the older version would school him.

You gave some examples of sub-heavyweights like light heavyweights and super middleweights when the discussion is about heavyweights. Even if we agree that they are also relevant, in none of those examples do events occur according the specific criteria I set.

Andre Ward isn't 10+ years younger than Darnell Boone. Likewise, the same with Adonis Stevenson and Darnell Boone, James Toney and Tiberi and so forth so on.

In heavyweight boxing specifically, there has almost never been an instance where a boxer close to the age of 40 (39-42 years of age as Wladimir Klitschko was when he lost to Anthony Joshua and Tyson Fury) defeated opponents who were more than 10 years younger, whilst they were also the best boxer / boxers at the time. It simply didn't happen! Expecting Wladimir Klitschko to be able to achieve such a feat is expecting something from Wladimir Klitshchko which has never been achieved by any past heavyweight. Thus, directly or indirectly making Wladimir Klitschko appear greater because he is held to a higher standard and is expected to achieve greater feats than what any other past heavyweight has achieved.

It doesn't matter whether Wlad came in shape or not. All it may prove is that a 40 year old Wladimir Klitschko is relatively better than those past heavyweight boxers when they were also 40 years of age. However, that doesn't mean that a 40 year old Wladimir Klitschko who is in relatively good shape compared to those other past heavyweights is going to be better than a 27 year old, in shape Anthony Joshua. That's reaching hugely!

You can't just assume that Wladimir Klitschko is going to be immune to deteriorating through aging, just because his circumstances aren't EXACTLY like those of past heavyweights. So far, what we do know is that a 40+ year old heavyweight hasn't beaten the best heavyweight opponent who was 10+ years younger. Until that happens, it's more reasonable to infer than not that a 40 year old heavyweight like Wladimir Klitschko is going to be inferior at around age 40, compared to how he was when he was younger.

If future heavyweights like Anthony Joshua can perform better than Wladimir Klitschko at around age 40 and defeat the best possible opponents who are also over 10 years younger than themselves, then you might have a point about age not being much of a factor when it comes to deterioration of boxing abilities. However, until such things happen, history has proven that the 40+ year old boxer is going to be inferior than the best boxers who are over 10 years younger and that is the norm to go by.

As to why aging causes an athlete's performance to decline. There are many possible reasons. Such as for example, continuous rigorous training for over a decade can lead to mileage and breakdown of the body. Which is the case with Wladimir Klitschko. Furthermore, studies have proven that the reflexes, reaction times and the mental sharpness of an older athlete is usually going to be lesser compared to the younger athlete. Thus, when the older athlete is SIGNIFICANTLY 'out-aged' as was the case with Wlad against Joshua and Fury, they will be at a significant disadvantage.

Also, Wladimir Klitschko already shown signs of declination in his match against Bryant Jennings

[soul_survivor]

People bring up his age all the time vs AJ/Fury but ignore the fact that he came in 240lbs vs AJ which was his lightest weight since 2009. He was still in incredible shape at the height of his experience. 2 years earlier when he beat Pulev he looked exactly the same as he'd had his entire career, but suddenly when he lost the "he's old" excuses started popping up.

This is what REAL "old" heavies look like from previous eras:

256lb Foreman, prime was around 220.



Larry Holmes, 226 vs Tyson, prime 212lbs



Lewis, 256 vs Vitali, prime 238lbs





That 240lb trim and cut Wlad is in NO way comparable to these guys, his skill wouldn't deteriorate half as fast staying in such amazing shape.

Spot on. Wlad was not old in the way people are trying to claim he was. IN fact, he looked the best he had done in years, his movement throughout the middle rounds was the best since probably as long as 2003.

His jab was the fastest and most dangerous since the Peter fight (after that he kept pawing with it) and his right hand was the most dangerous in almost 10 years. Regardless of how anyone thinks Wlad was physically, the right which hit AJ went off like a gunshot. I was there, 90 thousand people gasped and then for the 3 seconds AJ was on the crowd, no one made a sound.

90 thousand people were silent....let that sink in for a second.

AJ got up with a smile.

Wlad was far from finished. Then again, you have to remember these are the same people who claim Wlad had a "war" with Jennings lol

[Vinnykin]

Doesn't matter. Fact is, Wladimir Klitschko was 41 years old when he lost to Anthony Joshua (one of the best boxers of the current era who is more than 10 years younger than Wladimir Klitschko) and 39 years old when he lost to Tyson Fury (another one of the best boxers of the current era who is also more than 10 years younger than Wladimir Klitschko).

History has proven that all past heavyweight champions who were the best or one of the best during their era, were either retired or losing / having inferior performances compared to Wladimir Klitschko when they were younger or the same age as Wladimir Klitschko when he lost to Tyson Fury and Anthony Joshua. Therefore, proving that age does matter!

Otherwise, you're gonna need to find heavyweight boxers who were around 40 years of age, doing better against the best boxers that were more than 10 years younger than Wladimir Klitschko did.

We will see how good Anthony Joshua's or Tyson Fury's performances are when they are also around 40 years of age compared to Wladimir Klitschko's performances during the same period (assuming they aren't even retired by then). Especially their performances against the best opposition who are more than 10 years younger. If they aren't able to do any better than Wladimir Klitschko, then it will simply prove that age does matter and was a factor in Wlad's defeat against those guys. If they do worse, then it will just make Wladimir Klitschko look even better considering how good he was relative to other boxers at the same old age.

Good post. Fury even said in the build-up that he would retire if he couldn't beat an old man like Klitschko.....he did any way but the point is there.

I think it's just AJ fanboys that try to gloss over the fact that Klitschko was old, inactive and coming off a loss. They try to say "Klitschko looked the best he has done in years" to try to say that he was prime....ignoring the fact that he looked good because he was facing a fighter that was very limited skills wise.

Klitschko at 40 is still better than most HW's, a highly skilled fighter. But lets not kid on he was shar or prime vs Joshua. 35 year old Wlad would beat Joshua, that's a fact!

[Dip_Slide]

What made the fight competitive is the fact that Klitschko was a lot older, less active, slower than he used to be with a diminished ability to take a punch (he always had a bad chin, but this worsens with time) but he had the experience at that highest level, then u had AJ who never fought past 7 rounds fighting a good pro in front of 90000 fans for the very first time in only his 19th fight.

AJ showed his heart and his character, Klitschko showed his craftiness, but it's definitley not a measure of how good AJ actually is, it's a learning experience and it showed us that he can bite down and fight, but we won't be able to really gauge him until he fights the other reigning active top guys.

[Mr Objecitivity]

Good post. Fury even said in the build-up that he would retire if he couldn't beat an old man like Klitschko.....he did any way but the point is there.

I think it's just AJ fanboys that try to gloss over the fact that Klitschko was old, inactive and coming off a loss. They try to say "Klitschko looked the best he has done in years" to try to say that he was prime....ignoring the fact that he looked good because he was facing a fighter that was very limited skills wise.

Klitschko at 40 is still better than most HW's, a highly skilled fighter. But lets not kid on he was shar or prime vs Joshua. 35 year old Wlad would beat Joshua, that's a fact!

I agree. Although Wladimir Klitschko, when he fought Anthony Joshua was certainly not in his prime. He was still the best he could possibly be at that particular age and I believe he was better and more prepared in his match against Anthony Joshua than he was against Tyson Fury. Thus, I give Joshua more credit for his victory over Wlad than Fury's victory over Wlad. he was past his prime in both bouts. However, he seemed the best prepared against Joshua than against Fury. Against Fury, his wife had post pregnancy depression and he therefore missed multiple training sessions which prevented him from optimally preparing for the bout. Wlad actually wanted a rematch against Fury but Fury ducked out, most likely realizing and acknowledging the fact that Wlad would been more prepared in the rematch and he probably wasn't sufficiently confident of beating that version of Wlad. On the other hand, Wlad didn't bother taking a rematch against Joshua because he knew he gave it his all in the first bout.

[yoz]

Wladimir Klitschko had already shown his signs of decline in his fight against Bryant Jennings. He was past his absolute peak after 2012 anyway.

This ^^^^^^^.

[yoz]

People bring up his age all the time vs AJ/Fury but ignore the fact that he came in 240lbs vs AJ which was his lightest weight since 2009. He was still in incredible shape at the height of his experience. 2 years earlier when he beat Pulev he looked exactly the same as he'd had his entire career, but suddenly when he lost the "he's old" excuses started popping up.

This is what REAL "old" heavies look like from previous eras:

256lb Foreman, prime was around 220.



Larry Holmes, 226 vs Tyson, prime 212lbs



Lewis, 256 vs Vitali, prime 238lbs





That 240lb trim and cut Wlad is in NO way comparable to these guys, his skill wouldn't deteriorate half as fast staying in such amazing shape.

Not all fighters age the same way.

Just because Wladimir looked in top physical shape, it doesn't necessarily mean he was at the height of his powers for AJ.

It's like the idiots on here saying Lewis was at the peak of his powers for Vitali. It's garbage.

As someone has said, already, Wladimir had been in decline for a while. I felt the passing of Manny, in 2012, and the promotion of Banks served as a trigger point.

Banks looked out of his depth in every fight.