Wladimir Klitschko: Who would he beat?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagleskins

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hattonthehammer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagleskins

Wlad would destroy a prime Tyson. He would beat Holyfield. Him and Lewis would be a great fight. Everything else is before my time.

---

Your time obviously being from 2003 onwards as youve clearly never seen prime holyfield or tyson.

"My time" consists of the likes of lewis, bowe, holyfield, ruddock etc and i genuinely would be hard pushed to name one of them that wladimir could beat.

I do completely believe however that wladimir would of been a tad too much for bruno ;D;D;D

---

Yeah, Tyson was a monster. KTFO by Buster Douglas and Danny Williams. Wlad would intimidate Tyson before he ever stepped in the ring. Tyson is the most overrated fighter of all time. Do me a favor. Name one good fighter Tyson beat? Because there is a ton of tomato cans that beat him.

---

Never said tyson was a great fighter

but while were talking about knockouts hows about getting completely p*wned by the mighty corrie sanders and lamon brewster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hattonthehammer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagleskins

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hattonthehammer

Your time obviously being from 2003 onwards as youve clearly never seen prime holyfield or tyson.

"My time" consists of the likes of lewis, bowe, holyfield, ruddock etc and i genuinely would be hard pushed to name one of them that wladimir could beat.

I do completely believe however that wladimir would of been a tad too much for bruno ;D;D;D

---

Yeah, Tyson was a monster. KTFO by Buster Douglas and Danny Williams. Wlad would intimidate Tyson before he ever stepped in the ring. Tyson is the most overrated fighter of all time. Do me a favor. Name one good fighter Tyson beat? Because there is a ton of tomato cans that beat him.

---

Never said tyson was a great fighter

but while were talking about knockouts hows about getting completely p*wned by the mighty corrie sanders and lamon brewster

---

both of those guys are better than Douglas, McBride, and Williams. And both were early in Wlad's career. Sam Peter is a better fighter than Tyson ever beat. Not even close. Did you really just say Michael Spinks? You need to learn some boxing, bra.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagleskins

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hattonthehammer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagleskins

Yeah, Tyson was a monster. KTFO by Buster Douglas and Danny Williams. Wlad would intimidate Tyson before he ever stepped in the ring. Tyson is the most overrated fighter of all time. Do me a favor. Name one good fighter Tyson beat? Because there is a ton of tomato cans that beat him.

---

Never said tyson was a great fighter

but while were talking about knockouts hows about getting completely p*wned by the mighty corrie sanders and lamon brewster

---

both of those guys are better than Douglas, McBride, and Williams. And both were early in Wlad's career. Sam Peter is a better fighter than Tyson ever beat. Not even close. Did you really just say Michael Spinks? You need to learn some boxing, bra.

---

Thye weren't early in his career :confused: Wlad had been a pro for about 15 years and had over 40 fights when he got battered by Sanders!! And do you think Williams and McBride were in Tyson's prime then :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagleskins

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hattonthehammer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagleskins

Yeah, Tyson was a monster. KTFO by Buster Douglas and Danny Williams. Wlad would intimidate Tyson before he ever stepped in the ring. Tyson is the most overrated fighter of all time. Do me a favor. Name one good fighter Tyson beat? Because there is a ton of tomato cans that beat him.

---

Never said tyson was a great fighter

but while were talking about knockouts hows about getting completely p*wned by the mighty corrie sanders and lamon brewster

---

both of those guys are better than Douglas, McBride, and Williams. And both were early in Wlad's career. Sam Peter is a better fighter than Tyson ever beat. Not even close. Did you really just say Michael Spinks? You need to learn some boxing, bra.

---

tyson got beat by those guys because he was waiting for his pension plan to kick in

Wladmir got turned over by a tubby south african at the very age mike tyson was the most feared man on the planet

OK I'm going to be honest about a few things here

#1 If Corrie Sanders and Lamon Brewster got to fight more of the top tier fighters they would have been much more impressive fighters. They are still solid fighters, granted for a short period of time but Sanders was a threat to anyone who set foot in the ring with him, and nobody can argue that.

#2 If you look at the skill set of Wladimir Klitschko you will see he's built to beat a fighter "like" Tyson...could he keep his composure under Tyson's attack maybe not, but Wlad has everything you need to beat Tyson.

I think Wlad could have handled anyone considered 2nd tier in the era's of Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Tyson, Holyfield.....and I think personally he would have beaten Riddick Bowe (5 out of 10 times as previously stated) because as great as the guy fought, he never once faced a power puncher, and he didn't use his physical attributes to his advantage.

You guys also need to acknowledge that Wladimir Klitschko has fought more southpaws than any other heavyweight champion has had to. That's a very difficult thing to ask, Ali to my knowledge only fought 1, I'm not sure if Lewis fought any or even Tyson for that matter.

And to answer your question ICB Wladimir's never fought anyone on Spink's level because he's never even thought of fighting a light heavyweight much less considering such a fight to be an accomplishment. But to be totally honest I don't see Chris Byrd as any different than Spinks, he was just a full time heavyweight instead of being a light heavyweight first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

I can't see how any version of Holyfield would be really effective against Wlad. He always had a hard time with guys who could stay away.

---

I like youre thinking Taeth but I can't agree with you on Holyfield. He is the easiest fighter to underestimate, not the strongest, not the biggest, not the hardest or fastest puncher but very very consistent in his work and very effective.

There are 2 ways (that have been demonstrated in history) to beat Wladimir #1 Corrie Sanders - land hard punches and follow up #2 Purrity & Brewster - take everything Wlad hits you with and outlast his stamina.

I think Evander Holyfield's constant pressure, solid defense, granite chin and combination punching would have been too much for Wlad to handle. I mean Holyfield took everything Bowe had, Lennox Lewis had, Mike Tyson had, and he just kept coming forward. He's only been stopped 2 times once by Bowe when he had hepititus or something and once by James Toney when Evander tore up his shoulder.

When we talk about Ali many folks think it's a disgrace to say Wlad could beat him but history proves that Ali had trouble with guys who could box with him...I'm not saying Wlad would dominate Ali, I'm not trying to hate on Ali, I'm just saying he would need a lot more than the "rope-a-dope" to beat Wlad. Although Ali had very quick hands, good defense, and a great chin which probably would have won him fights over lots of people (including Wladimir, I think the big key for Ali is fast hands + combination punching as not many heavyweights ever have both) he wasn't invincible.

---

Prime Ali v prime Wlad? only 1 winner and it aint Wlad. Prime Wlad v Ali post 1975? Its a 5/10er
Prime Holmes v Prime Wlad? Holmes by late KO
Prime Foreman v Prime Wlad? Foreman by early KO
Prime Tubbs,Thomas,Smith and the rest of the alphabet title holders of the 80s,90s and 2000s v Prime Wlad? Wlad to win 90% of them.
The reason why i say 90% is to allow for the odd one to slip through the net and score a knockout.
Im not being disrespectful to Wlad as hes a fine champion in his own right, its just that i dont find him as good as what some may do.
As for Holmes, and im not a Holmes nuthugger-in fact the opposite, i think your underestimating Holmes. Actually,im wrong, i dont think your underestimating Holmes, just his punch power and fantastic right hand (not just power,but precision and speed) and i think you just believe Wlad would beat him. Which is fair enough cos i see where your coming from. Again this is just my take on things. Feel free to rip me apart

http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...-beaten-4.html
I just read an 3 1/2 year old thread that some people were asking who Wlad would beat in ALi's era. And some people say that Wlad fighting Ali would be like the WLad-Chris Byrd fight. ;D Comparing Ali to Chris Byrd? Might as well compare George Foreman to Razor Ruddock. These Wlad fans I tell you.:cool:

I feel Wlad would have beaten a slew of heavyweight's. Right now he is the best and most hated fighter. I don't know why this is,he is a class act in and out of the ring.HE stops just about everyone he has faced in recent years. People are still saying he can be knocked out or beaten by whomever. But the fact of the matter is RIGHT NOW he has not be in any type of trouble or even knocked down in damn near five years. He has consistantly gotten better under the tutalage of E-man and he has taught him really to keep everything in his range and not mix it up.Ultimately leading to a TKO or stoppage.

My list of heavyweight's who would give Wlad problems
Lennox
Foreman
Tyson ( before Bruno I)
maybe Larry Holmes early on but would wilt under the weight, power,and accuracy.
A prime Cassius Clay,maybe but I think would wilt also under the weight and power, (not the Ali who sat on the ropes he would be a sitting duck and yes be stopped).
Styles make fight's and these are the guy's I think would give Wlad problems. All of the old time fighter's like Dempsey, Marciano, Louis, are just to damn small.

I feel Wlad would have beaten a slew of heavyweight's. Right now he is the best and most hated fighter. I don't know why this is,he is a class act in and out of the ring.HE stops just about everyone he has faced in recent years. People are still saying he can be knocked out or beaten by whomever. But the fact of the matter is RIGHT NOW he has not be in any type of trouble or even knocked down in damn near five years. He has consistantly gotten better under the tutalage of E-man and he has taught him really to keep everything in his range and not mix it up.Ultimately leading to a TKO or stoppage.

My list of heavyweight's who would give Wlad problems
Lennox
Foreman
Tyson ( before Bruno I)
maybe Larry Holmes early on but would wilt under the weight, power,and accuracy.
A prime Cassius Clay,maybe but I think would wilt also under the weight and power, (not the Ali who sat on the ropes he would be a sitting duck and yes be stopped).
Styles make fight's and these are the guy's I think would give Wlad problems. All of the old time fighter's like Dempsey, Marciano, Louis, are just to damn small.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

OK I'm going to be honest about a few things here

#1 If Corrie Sanders and Lamon Brewster got to fight more of the top tier fighters they would have been much more impressive fighters. They are still solid fighters, granted for a short period of time but Sanders was a threat to anyone who set foot in the ring with him, and nobody can argue that.

#2 If you look at the skill set of Wladimir Klitschko you will see he's built to beat a fighter "like" Tyson...could he keep his composure under Tyson's attack maybe not, but Wlad has everything you need to beat Tyson.

I think Wlad could have handled anyone considered 2nd tier in the era's of Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Tyson, Holyfield.....and I think personally he would have beaten Riddick Bowe (5 out of 10 times as previously stated) because as great as the guy fought, he never once faced a power puncher, and he didn't use his physical attributes to his advantage.

You guys also need to acknowledge that Wladimir Klitschko has fought more southpaws than any other heavyweight champion has had to. That's a very difficult thing to ask, Ali to my knowledge only fought 1, I'm not sure if Lewis fought any or even Tyson for that matter.

And to answer your question ICB Wladimir's never fought anyone on Spink's level because he's never even thought of fighting a light heavyweight much less considering such a fight to be an accomplishment. But to be totally honest I don't see Chris Byrd as any different than Spinks, he was just a full time heavyweight instead of being a light heavyweight first.

---

I'll agree he has the tools to beat Tyson, but I think i'd go with prime Tyson to beat current Wlad due to his brilliant head movement, that would get him past the jab IMO and Tysons power once he did get in. Then again Douglas didn't have a great chin (look at what Evander did to it) and he got by Tyson and used his jab well.

All in all though i'd go with prime Tyson!

generalbulldog, I have been known to question the greatness of Ali, but I always give him respect. As for what I said about Chris Byrd....
Ali
Height: 6'3
Weight: 212
Reach: 80"

Wlad
Height: 6'7
Weight:243
Reach: 81"

4 inches, 30 pounds, 1" in reach...Ali never came across a fighter like that and any power Ali had came from his speed and accumulation of damage/fatigue on his opponent. Chris Byrd was a big stretch, but who has Wlad fought that was a skilled boxer, had little KO power, fast hands, and a very solid chin? Chris Byrd. Am I saying Ali would get his ass kicked like Chris Byrd ? no (I may have been 4 years ago, but not right now), I'm saying Ali would be undersized and out gunned...not that he wasn't used to that but he may have been used to that bigger person in the ring lacking in technical boxing skill and this would not be the case if they fought. However improbable it is to consider Wlad winning this fight it's not impossible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjj tszyu

I'll agree he has the tools to beat Tyson, but I think i'd go with prime Tyson to beat current Wlad due to his brilliant head movement, that would get him past the jab IMO and Tysons power once he did get in. Then again Douglas didn't have a great chin (look at what Evander did to it) and he got by Tyson and used his jab well.

All in all though i'd go with prime Tyson!

---

But you do see it's not crazy to think Wlad has a shot vs Tyson and that's all I'm saying.

Lyle you obviously don't know anything about Tyson because he's the worst possible match-up for Wlad. He'd beat up Wlad so badly it would be nasty to watch. Tyson had more technical skill in his left pinky than Wlad has in his entire arsenal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

Lyle you obviously don't know anything about Tyson because he's the worst possible match-up for Wlad. He'd beat up Wlad so badly it would be nasty to watch. Tyson had more technical skill in his left pinky than Wlad has in his entire arsenal.

---

I know Mike Tyson got rocked by Bruno, Bonecrusher Smith, Buster Douglas, and Holyfield...all of which we can assume that don't hit as hard as Wladimir.

I know Tyson had trouble with Tony Tucker, Buster Douglas, and Lennox Lewis all of whom were tall lanky boxer/punchers

I mean I get where you are coming from it could be like Tyson-Golota but it could just as easily be like Tyson-Douglas.

Yes Mike had great head movement he cut off the run really well but in hindsight he didn't work all that great on the inside, he allowed for fighters to tie him up, he could get stymied by the jab alone, and the longer you lasted with him the less likely Tyson was to win.

I know no one Wlad has fought has had Tyson-esque head movement but a lot of guys have just stopped looking for a win and started looking for a way out after a few rounds of eating that jab.

It's not a sure thing either way is all I am saying I'd say 60-40 out of 100 fights Tyson-Wlad. That's not unreasonable is it? I mean it may be unreasonable to the people who think Tyson could beat anyone ever in the history of but hey I'm just trying to be reasonable here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

Lyle you obviously don't know anything about Tyson because he's the worst possible match-up for Wlad. He'd beat up Wlad so badly it would be nasty to watch. Tyson had more technical skill in his left pinky than Wlad has in his entire arsenal.

---

I know Mike Tyson got rocked by Bruno, Bonecrusher Smith, Buster Douglas, and Holyfield...all of which we can assume that don't hit as hard as Wladimir.

I know Tyson had trouble with Tony Tucker, Buster Douglas, and Lennox Lewis all of whom were tall lanky boxer/punchers

I mean I get where you are coming from it could be like Tyson-Golota but it could just as easily be like Tyson-Douglas.

Yes Mike had great head movement he cut off the run really well but in hindsight he didn't work all that great on the inside, he allowed for fighters to tie him up, he could get stymied by the jab alone, and the longer you lasted with him the less likely Tyson was to win.

I know no one Wlad has fought has had Tyson-esque head movement but a lot of guys have just stopped looking for a win and started looking for a way out after a few rounds of eating that jab.

It's not a sure thing either way is all I am saying I'd say 60-40 out of 100 fights Tyson-Wlad. That's not unreasonable is it? I mean it may be unreasonable to the people who think Tyson could beat anyone ever in the history of but hey I'm just trying to be reasonable here

---

Vlad is that you? ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

generalbulldog, I have been known to question the greatness of Ali, but I always give him respect. As for what I said about Chris Byrd....
Ali
Height: 6'3
Weight: 212
Reach: 80"

Wlad
Height: 6'7
Weight:243
Reach: 81"

4 inches, 30 pounds, 1" in reach...Ali never came across a fighter like that and any power Ali had came from his speed and accumulation of damage/fatigue on his opponent. Chris Byrd was a big stretch, but who has Wlad fought that was a skilled boxer, had little KO power, fast hands, and a very solid chin? Chris Byrd. Am I saying Ali would get his ass kicked like Chris Byrd ? no (I may have been 4 years ago, but not right now), I'm saying Ali would be undersized and out gunned...not that he wasn't used to that but he may have been used to that bigger person in the ring lacking in technical boxing skill and this would not be the case if they fought. However improbable it is to consider Wlad winning this fight it's not impossible.

---

Duly noted that Ali has never faced someone of Wlad's physical dimensions. But Ali was in a golden age of HWs and somehow he usually finds a way to win. I dont' think there is an debate that his resume is more impressive than Wlads?

In these mythical matchup let's say you put Wlad in 1967 against Ali without any of today's advancement in medical sports science and nutrition along with 15 round fights where he is known not to have great stamina, then really I don't fancy his chance against Ali. He may not even be 243. If you put an 25 year old Ali in 2006 against the 30 year old Wlad with all the nutritional supplements and advancement in medical sports science I see quite possibly him being even heavier (maybe around 220-225) and retaining all his quickness and speed, Ali still has to be the heavy favorite.

Wlad is very good for this era, but I just don't really fancy his chance against an Prime Foreman, ALi, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

Lyle you obviously don't know anything about Tyson because he's the worst possible match-up for Wlad. He'd beat up Wlad so badly it would be nasty to watch. Tyson had more technical skill in his left pinky than Wlad has in his entire arsenal.

---

I know Mike Tyson got rocked by Bruno, Bonecrusher Smith, Buster Douglas, and Holyfield...all of which we can assume that don't hit as hard as Wladimir.

I know Tyson had trouble with Tony Tucker, Buster Douglas, and Lennox Lewis all of whom were tall lanky boxer/punchers

I mean I get where you are coming from it could be like Tyson-Golota but it could just as easily be like Tyson-Douglas.

Yes Mike had great head movement he cut off the run really well but in hindsight he didn't work all that great on the inside, he allowed for fighters to tie him up, he could get stymied by the jab alone, and the longer you lasted with him the less likely Tyson was to win.

I know no one Wlad has fought has had Tyson-esque head movement but a lot of guys have just stopped looking for a win and started looking for a way out after a few rounds of eating that jab.

It's not a sure thing either way is all I am saying I'd say 60-40 out of 100 fights Tyson-Wlad. That's not unreasonable is it? I mean it may be unreasonable to the people who think Tyson could beat anyone ever in the history of but hey I'm just trying to be reasonable here

---

hahaha Its admirable how you defend your fighter Lyle. Its just too bad you couldn't have chosen a better fighter to defend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hulk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

Lyle you obviously don't know anything about Tyson because he's the worst possible match-up for Wlad. He'd beat up Wlad so badly it would be nasty to watch. Tyson had more technical skill in his left pinky than Wlad has in his entire arsenal.

---

I know Mike Tyson got rocked by Bruno, Bonecrusher Smith, Buster Douglas, and Holyfield...all of which we can assume that don't hit as hard as Wladimir.

I know Tyson had trouble with Tony Tucker, Buster Douglas, and Lennox Lewis all of whom were tall lanky boxer/punchers

I mean I get where you are coming from it could be like Tyson-Golota but it could just as easily be like Tyson-Douglas.

Yes Mike had great head movement he cut off the run really well but in hindsight he didn't work all that great on the inside, he allowed for fighters to tie him up, he could get stymied by the jab alone, and the longer you lasted with him the less likely Tyson was to win.

I know no one Wlad has fought has had Tyson-esque head movement but a lot of guys have just stopped looking for a win and started looking for a way out after a few rounds of eating that jab.

It's not a sure thing either way is all I am saying I'd say 60-40 out of 100 fights Tyson-Wlad. That's not unreasonable is it? I mean it may be unreasonable to the people who think Tyson could beat anyone ever in the history of but hey I'm just trying to be reasonable here

---

hahaha Its admirable how you defend your fighter Lyle. Its just too bad you couldn't have chosen a better fighter to defend.

---

Actually, his arguments make a lot of sense. NOt saying Wlad would have automatically beaten them all but in all honesty, I think he would have had all his chances. Sometimes the halo of peoples from the past shine to hard that we tend to see them a lot more than what they used to be. Tyson was very good but lacked discipline and struggled against slick guys, especially if they could make it to the fifth rounds where Tyson was then starting to fade dramatically. Maybe it would have been different is D'Amato would have lived longer. Maybe not, we'll never know, but fact, Tyson got beaten badly by Holyfield and LEwis because they were slick and rolling around him and he just couldn't deal with it. As for Ali and the others, I think Wlad would have had his chance, too. Most definitely.

I think Wlad would have beaten Joe Frazier. Joe had a good left and all, but Wlad would have kept control of him with the jab and kept putting that hammer of a right on him until Joe's corner called it off.

I think a prime Tyson gives Wlad a run, but probably falls short. Mike's head spead would have made him miss and Tyson would have countered to the body or anything else Wlad left open. It would have been a more controlled version of what Lamon Brewster did in their first fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hulk

hahaha Its admirable how you defend your fighter Lyle. Its just too bad you couldn't have chosen a better fighter to defend.

---

...yeah if only I could have hopped on the Mayorga bandwagon :beat:

people actually think Wlad beats Frazier & Tyson :Lol: Wlad has a better chance against Ali

He might just beat Joe Louis. I'll give you that. Wlad is big and athletic and would pose problems to the slow-footed Joe Louis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

people actually think Wlad beats Frazier & Tyson :Lol: Wlad has a better chance against Ali

He might just beat Joe Louis. I'll give you that. Wlad is big and athletic and would pose problems to the slow-footed Joe Louis.

---

Louis would wipe the floor with the majority of great heavyweights because JOE LOUIS is the greatest heavyweight of all time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

people actually think Wlad beats Frazier & Tyson :Lol: Wlad has a better chance against Ali

He might just beat Joe Louis. I'll give you that. Wlad is big and athletic and would pose problems to the slow-footed Joe Louis.

---

Louis would wipe the floor with the majority of great heavyweights because JOE LOUIS is the 2nd greatest heavyweight of all time.

---

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

people actually think Wlad beats Frazier & Tyson :Lol: Wlad has a better chance against Ali

He might just beat Joe Louis. I'll give you that. Wlad is big and athletic and would pose problems to the slow-footed Joe Louis.

---

I do think Wlad beats Frazier. Frazier would have tried to walk through whatever Wlad threw at him to hit him with the left hook. Wlad likes to tie up little men when they get on the inside, but before that he'd continuously pop Jjoe with his jab. Joe's left hook would be a non-factor because Wlad would wrap him up when he got close enough to use it and begin throwing that mean straight right after the first couple rounds. It would be a repeat of what Foreman did to him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

people actually think Wlad beats Frazier & Tyson :Lol: Wlad has a better chance against Ali

He might just beat Joe Louis. I'll give you that. Wlad is big and athletic and would pose problems to the slow-footed Joe Louis.

---

I do think Wlad beats Frazier. Frazier would have tried to walk through whatever Wlad threw at him to hit him with the left hook. Wlad likes to tie up little men when they get on the inside, but before that he'd continuously pop Jjoe with his jab. Joe's left hook would be a non-factor because Wlad would wrap him up when he got close enough to use it and begin throwing that mean straight right after the first couple rounds. It would be a repeat of what Foreman did to him.

---

You are forgetting Joe Frazier is a much better quality "little" man than anyone Wlad has fought and grabbing and holding someone of Fraziers quality would be much harder than you are making it out to be! Frazier fought in the Golden era of HW's and only lost to 2 men and 1 was the G.O.A.T. the other was the most devastating puncher in the history of the sport.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

people actually think Wlad beats Frazier & Tyson :Lol: Wlad has a better chance against Ali

He might just beat Joe Louis. I'll give you that. Wlad is big and athletic and would pose problems to the slow-footed Joe Louis.

---

Louis would wipe the floor with the majority of great heavyweights because JOE LOUIS is the greatest heavyweight of all time.

---

Joe Louis is probably the greatest HW ever. I know for a fact he never lost to someone 3 times. I mean the so called self proclaimed greatest lost to Ken Norton 3 times and got 2 gift decisions.

I think you would like this article Lyle, it details how Joe Louis would beat the so called greatest.

How Joe Louis Would have Beaten Muhammad Ali

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

people actually think Wlad beats Frazier & Tyson :Lol: Wlad has a better chance against Ali

He might just beat Joe Louis. I'll give you that. Wlad is big and athletic and would pose problems to the slow-footed Joe Louis.

---

Louis would wipe the floor with the majority of great heavyweights because JOE LOUIS is the greatest heavyweight of all time.

---

Joe Louis is probably the greatest HW ever. I know for a fact he never lost to someone 3 times. I mean the so called self proclaimed greatest lost to Ken Norton 3 times and got 2 gift decisions.

I think you would like this article Lyle, it details how Joe Louis would beat the so called greatest.

How Joe Louis Would have Beaten Muhammad Ali

---

I beg to differ. I think Ali would beat him. A thousand outcomes can be written but no-one will ever know for sure. Ali certainly fought the better opponents IMO and we can only speculate how good he would have been in his years away from the sport.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Wladimir is probably the most technically skilled fighter out there right now not named Mayweather.

---

Put down the crack pipe.

It's easy to look technically skilled against overweight plodders who don't have the fitness, agility or ambition to take you out of your comfort zone.

I am of the mindset that current athletes in most instances compete at a higher level than athletes from 20-30 years ago. I think current athletes can take advantage of modern science (nutrition) and training techniques and in many cases start at a younger age. Also, there is way more money involved now so everyone trys to be a professional athlete for the most part (starting in grade school) and you are closer to having the very best people at the top of the game. When I watch videos of some of the fighters from the 70s, 60s, and even 80s etc their technique is terrible and it reminds me of a bar room brawl. You stick those guys in with a guy like Wlad who has great technique they will get killed.

I think Wlad would beat any of the past fighters most of the time if you plucked them from the past and stuck them in the ring with Wlad. Now if they had access to the same resources Wlad has had for the last 20 years than maybe they could compete but who knows it is a different game now......This is IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjj tszyu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

people actually think Wlad beats Frazier & Tyson :Lol: Wlad has a better chance against Ali

He might just beat Joe Louis. I'll give you that. Wlad is big and athletic and would pose problems to the slow-footed Joe Louis.

---

I do think Wlad beats Frazier. Frazier would have tried to walk through whatever Wlad threw at him to hit him with the left hook. Wlad likes to tie up little men when they get on the inside, but before that he'd continuously pop Jjoe with his jab. Joe's left hook would be a non-factor because Wlad would wrap him up when he got close enough to use it and begin throwing that mean straight right after the first couple rounds. It would be a repeat of what Foreman did to him.

---

You are forgetting Joe Frazier is a much better quality "little" man than anyone Wlad has fought and grabbing and holding someone of Fraziers quality would be much harder than you are making it out to be! Frazier fought in the Golden era of HW's and only lost to 2 men and 1 was the G.O.A.T. the other was the most devastating puncher in the history of the sport.

---

And I think Wlad hits harder than Foreman and was more athletic. Lamon Brewster was a high quality 'little' man and there was no reason for him to win their first fight. He had to go through a hell most fighters couldn't have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjj tszyu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zilla

I do think Wlad beats Frazier. Frazier would have tried to walk through whatever Wlad threw at him to hit him with the left hook. Wlad likes to tie up little men when they get on the inside, but before that he'd continuously pop Jjoe with his jab. Joe's left hook would be a non-factor because Wlad would wrap him up when he got close enough to use it and begin throwing that mean straight right after the first couple rounds. It would be a repeat of what Foreman did to him.

---

You are forgetting Joe Frazier is a much better quality "little" man than anyone Wlad has fought and grabbing and holding someone of Fraziers quality would be much harder than you are making it out to be! Frazier fought in the Golden era of HW's and only lost to 2 men and 1 was the G.O.A.T. the other was the most devastating puncher in the history of the sport.

---

And I think Wlad hits harder than Foreman and was more athletic. Lamon Brewster was a high quality 'little' man and there was no reason for him to win their first fight. He had to go through a hell most fighters couldn't have.

---

You honestly think Wlad hits harder than Foreman?? Well i'll respect your opinion and thats where i'll leave that topic!

One thing though, if your trying to say Lamon Brewster is of the same quality as Joe Frazier then you are totally insane!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hunter

I am of the mindset that current athletes in most instances compete at a higher level than athletes from 20-30 years ago. I think current athletes can take advantage of modern science (nutrition) and training techniques and in many cases start at a younger age. Also, there is way more money involved now so everyone trys to be a professional athlete for the most part (starting in grade school) and you are closer to having the very best people at the top of the game. When I watch videos of some of the fighters from the 70s, 60s, and even 80s etc their technique is terrible and it reminds me of a bar room brawl. You stick those guys in with a guy like Wlad who has great technique they will get killed.

I think Wlad would beat any of the past fighters most of the time if you plucked them from the past and stuck them in the ring with Wlad. Now if they had access to the same resources Wlad has had for the last 20 years than maybe they could compete but who knows it is a different game now......This is IMO.

---

I totally disagree, technically fighters from the past have been far more gifted than todays crop. People like Ali, Louis, Holyfield, Tyson, SRR, SRL, Roberto Duran, Marvin Hagler (and the list goes on and on) were a lot more gifted than anyone today technically with the exception of Mayweather (maybe). Yes Wlad has good fundamentals, but he is also very robotic in what he does and in comparison to the likes of Ali, Tyson, Frazier etc is a slow HW.

One thing I do agree with you on is that "most" top athletes now are at a higher level than in years gone by, but not for me in boxing. Now the reason boxing hasn't moved with the times as other sports has is because the people who used to come to boxing are going to other sports where the rewards are higher and the risks are way lower. I mean look at boxing in the 80's for example. Ray Leonards fights used to make more money than the big fights now and when you take inflation into account that is an amazing feat. Same goes for Tyson and hell Ali for that matter. When Ali fought Foreman he made £5million. Now almost 40 years later David Haye did almost 1million PPV sales for Sky in his last bout and made the same 5 million. So how, may I ask is there more money in the sport now?? I'll agree there is more money in other sports, but boxing doesn't hold the same interest it once did and hasn't moved with the times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sumkalambay

people actually think Wlad beats Frazier & Tyson :Lol: Wlad has a better chance against Ali

He might just beat Joe Louis. I'll give you that. Wlad is big and athletic and would pose problems to the slow-footed Joe Louis.

---

Louis would wipe the floor with the majority of great heavyweights because JOE LOUIS is the greatest heavyweight of all time.

---

Joe Louis is probably the greatest HW ever. I know for a fact he never lost to someone 3 times. I mean the so called self proclaimed greatest lost to Ken Norton 3 times and got 2 gift decisions.

I think you would like this article Lyle, it details how Joe Louis would beat the so called greatest.

How Joe Louis Would have Beaten Muhammad Ali

---

Actually Muhammad Ali had 6 gift decisions.

Ken Norton x3
Doug Jones
Earnie Shavers
Jimmy Young

I think he lost 4 of the decisions i listed there, with one draw to Doug Jones.

I also heard his fight with Alfredo Evangelista was close aswell, although i've only seen bits and pieces of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjj tszyu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zilla

I do think Wlad beats Frazier. Frazier would have tried to walk through whatever Wlad threw at him to hit him with the left hook. Wlad likes to tie up little men when they get on the inside, but before that he'd continuously pop Jjoe with his jab. Joe's left hook would be a non-factor because Wlad would wrap him up when he got close enough to use it and begin throwing that mean straight right after the first couple rounds. It would be a repeat of what Foreman did to him.

---

You are forgetting Joe Frazier is a much better quality "little" man than anyone Wlad has fought and grabbing and holding someone of Fraziers quality would be much harder than you are making it out to be! Frazier fought in the Golden era of HW's and only lost to 2 men and 1 was the G.O.A.T. the other was the most devastating puncher in the history of the sport.

---

And I think Wlad hits harder than Foreman and was more athletic. Lamon Brewster was a high quality 'little' man and there was no reason for him to win their first fight. He had to go through a hell most fighters couldn't have.

---

George Foreman hits much harder than Wladimir Klitschko. And since when has Lamon Brewster been a high quality little man ?

I like Lamon Brewster and defended him in the last thread, but he was not elite. He got beat convincingly in his prime to Clifford Eitenne, Charles Shufford.

Yes he held a title and made a few defences, but even so i don't think anyone would ever label Lamon Brewster an elite fighter. Infact he's an overachiever that he actually managed to win a belt, and defend it a few times.

And that the fact he beat Wladimir Klitschko, speaks volumes IMO. And when the rematch happened Lamon Brewster was a shell of his former self.

In defense of the loss to Etienne, Lamon did screw his knee up in that fight

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Actually Muhammad Ali had 6 gift decisions.

Ken Norton x3
Doug Jones
Earnie Shavers
Jimmy Young

I think he lost 4 of the decisions i listed there, with one draw to Doug Jones.

I also heard his fight with Alfredo Evangelista was close aswell, although i've only seen bits and pieces of it.

---

Ali most definitely did not get 3 gifts against Norton, seeing as Norton WON the first fight. Need to work on your maths Ice. ;)

I do think Norton won 2 out of 3 (although I also thought he edged Larry Holmes), but I think Ali beat Jones, Shavers & Young. He's not a complete shoe-in for greatest HW of all time, although he does just edge Louis for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zilla

And I think Wlad hits harder than Foreman and was more athletic. Lamon Brewster was a high quality 'little' man and there was no reason for him to win their first fight. He had to go through a hell most fighters couldn't have.

---

No way does Wlad hit harder than Foreman. He hits hard, a lot harder than many give him credit for, but not harder than Foreman. Lamon Brewster was not a high quality 'little' man for me, but even if he was Joe Frazier was an ATG 'little' man. The last sentence is just stupid if you've ever seen Frazier's fights, particularly the Thrilla In Manilla, where he fought blind. Frazier defined heart, if Brewster could do it, Smokin' Joe would have done it as a doddle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Wladimir is probably the most technically skilled fighter out there right now not named Mayweather.

---

No, he's not Lyle. He's very good, certainly much, much better than some of the haters on here give him credit for, but aside from Mayweather, there's Bernard Hopkins, Juan Manuel Marquez, Chad Dawson, Ivan Calderon, Hozumi Hasegawa & Tim Bradley, all of whom you could make strong arguments for being more technically skilled & there's at least a couple who are dead certs on that.

Jaz out of your group I would say only Dawson could dominate another top teir fighter with just 1 hand. Wlad is so far ahead of the rest of the heavyweights he could almost fight the best out there with "one hand tied behind his back" that's how good his jab and left hook are. The offense of Wladimir is far superior to all the fighters you mentioned...defense probably not but it's at least on par with them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Jaz out of your group I would say only Dawson could dominate another top teir fighter with just 1 hand. Wlad is so far ahead of the rest of the heavyweights he could almost fight the best out there with "one hand tied behind his back" that's how good his jab and left hook are. The offense of Wladimir is far superior to all the fighters you mentioned...defense probably not but it's at least on par with them.

---

Well he can't literally do it with only one hand. He needs the right hand to block and be there to at least give the threat of throwing it. Also without using the right hand Wlad couldn't do his signature 1-2 punch :) And let's not forget about the added benefit Wlad's size offers for his offense.

Not to take away from Wlad as a fighter but seeing this "with one hand tied behind his back" for the 2nd time, I just had to comment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Jaz out of your group I would say only Dawson could dominate another top teir fighter with just 1 hand. Wlad is so far ahead of the rest of the heavyweights he could almost fight the best out there with "one hand tied behind his back" that's how good his jab and left hook are. The offense of Wladimir is far superior to all the fighters you mentioned...defense probably not but it's at least on par with them.

---

What's your definition of technical skills??:confused: Wlad is extremely hard to out-box but that doesn't mean he has great technical skills.

It's like saying Muhammad Ali had great technical skills.

I mean Wladimir is fundamentally sound, so much so that he can have what many see as "glaring weaknesses" (chin, stamina) and can still be THE dominant fighter in the division.