Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time great heavyweights?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

I would argue that total domination of all his opponents in title defenses is a good accomplishment. You could argue, perhaps successfully too, that his division is weak and because of that he's doing a good job of defending his title.

But if you look at Benny Leonard heck or even Willie Pep better yet what business did Two Ton Tony have being in the ring with Joe Luis?

All I can ask of a champion of a division is to win the fight. I can't ask them to conjure up an almost even match opponent.

Let me propose a question if I may, If the Klitschko brothers fought tooth and nail for their title defenses would people still suggest that the heavyweight division is lacking? We call Manny and Mayweather great (they are mind you) but we recall their hard fights against the likes of Castillo, DLH, Marquez, Morales, Emanual Augustus Burton (personal favourite journeyman :P)

How do we know the boxers they fight are bums and tomato cans if the only gauge we have is their total domination of those boxers?

---

Your missing my point.

Wlad isnt the best in the division, Vitali is. Dont believe me, prove me wrong. Oh you cant.

Yes, Wlad has managed to stay undefeated for a few years but hes still not the undisputed best and im not JUST on about having Vitalis belt as well but the uncertainty of who would win if they fought. His dominance can always be disputed because while his brother is active and winning and they dont fight there is always that dispute over who is better.

Vitali has that fight with a known quantity Lennox Lewis and he gave him his hardest fight. Could Wlad have done that? I doubt it.

---

That right that Vitali landed in the 2nd that badly hurt Lewis would of dropped him if it was Wlad who landed it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

I would argue that total domination of all his opponents in title defenses is a good accomplishment. You could argue, perhaps successfully too, that his division is weak and because of that he's doing a good job of defending his title.

But if you look at Benny Leonard heck or even Willie Pep better yet what business did Two Ton Tony have being in the ring with Joe Luis?

All I can ask of a champion of a division is to win the fight. I can't ask them to conjure up an almost even match opponent.

Let me propose a question if I may, If the Klitschko brothers fought tooth and nail for their title defenses would people still suggest that the heavyweight division is lacking? We call Manny and Mayweather great (they are mind you) but we recall their hard fights against the likes of Castillo, DLH, Marquez, Morales, Emanual Augustus Burton (personal favourite journeyman :P)

How do we know the boxers they fight are bums and tomato cans if the only gauge we have is their total domination of those boxers?

---

Your missing my point.

Wlad isnt the best in the division, Vitali is. Dont believe me, prove me wrong. Oh you cant.

Yes, Wlad has managed to stay undefeated for a few years but hes still not the undisputed best and im not JUST on about having Vitalis belt as well but the uncertainty of who would win if they fought. His dominance can always be disputed because while his brother is active and winning and they dont fight there is always that dispute over who is better.

Vitali has that fight with a known quantity Lennox Lewis and he gave him his hardest fight. Could Wlad have done that? I doubt it.

---

That right that Vitali landed in the 2nd that badly hurt Lewis would of dropped him if it was Wlad who landed it

---

You reckon Wlad would have had the balls to stand in punching range without holding and leaning?

Also, conversly. The uppercut that Lewis landed in the 5th would have put Wlad to sleep.

We all know its more important to be tough than hit hard.

Who knows on the right night he beats any of em, just as he looses to any of em on the wrong night . All these threads are is pure speculation and yeah they're fun but to mock someone cause they possibly put them in the top ten or not even in the top thirty is stupid, its all subjective and unprovable. Even if wlad wasn't allowed to grab and hug as much as he does he's very formidable, people say he's not nimble and shit, he was nimble enough for haye, who only landed a handful punches and people view him as a quick heavy. As for tyson fury, wlad got legitly smoked only by sanders, a big puncher, purity and brewster he dominated till his stamina betrayed him, wlad wouldn't have had to get off the canvas to beat a nevin pajkic because he would have never even made it to the canvas, if that fight ever comes off wlad smokes fury.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

I would argue that total domination of all his opponents in title defenses is a good accomplishment. You could argue, perhaps successfully too, that his division is weak and because of that he's doing a good job of defending his title.

But if you look at Benny Leonard heck or even Willie Pep better yet what business did Two Ton Tony have being in the ring with Joe Luis?

All I can ask of a champion of a division is to win the fight. I can't ask them to conjure up an almost even match opponent.

Let me propose a question if I may, If the Klitschko brothers fought tooth and nail for their title defenses would people still suggest that the heavyweight division is lacking? We call Manny and Mayweather great (they are mind you) but we recall their hard fights against the likes of Castillo, DLH, Marquez, Morales, Emanual Augustus Burton (personal favourite journeyman :P)

How do we know the boxers they fight are bums and tomato cans if the only gauge we have is their total domination of those boxers?

---

Your missing my point.

Wlad isnt the best in the division, Vitali is. Dont believe me, prove me wrong. Oh you cant.

Yes, Wlad has managed to stay undefeated for a few years but hes still not the undisputed best and im not JUST on about having Vitalis belt as well but the uncertainty of who would win if they fought. His dominance can always be disputed because while his brother is active and winning and they dont fight there is always that dispute over who is better.

Vitali has that fight with a known quantity Lennox Lewis and he gave him his hardest fight. Could Wlad have done that? I doubt it.

---

I don't disagree, I too think Vitali is the better one, but my point was more about how we decide how tough his opposition is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

I would argue that total domination of all his opponents in title defenses is a good accomplishment. You could argue, perhaps successfully too, that his division is weak and because of that he's doing a good job of defending his title.

But if you look at Benny Leonard heck or even Willie Pep better yet what business did Two Ton Tony have being in the ring with Joe Luis?

All I can ask of a champion of a division is to win the fight. I can't ask them to conjure up an almost even match opponent.

Let me propose a question if I may, If the Klitschko brothers fought tooth and nail for their title defenses would people still suggest that the heavyweight division is lacking? We call Manny and Mayweather great (they are mind you) but we recall their hard fights against the likes of Castillo, DLH, Marquez, Morales, Emanual Augustus Burton (personal favourite journeyman :P)

How do we know the boxers they fight are bums and tomato cans if the only gauge we have is their total domination of those boxers?

---

Your missing my point.

Wlad isnt the best in the division, Vitali is. Dont believe me, prove me wrong. Oh you cant.

Yes, Wlad has managed to stay undefeated for a few years but hes still not the undisputed best and im not JUST on about having Vitalis belt as well but the uncertainty of who would win if they fought. His dominance can always be disputed because while his brother is active and winning and they dont fight there is always that dispute over who is better.

Vitali has that fight with a known quantity Lennox Lewis and he gave him his hardest fight. Could Wlad have done that? I doubt it.

---

That right that Vitali landed in the 2nd that badly hurt Lewis would of dropped him if it was Wlad who landed it

---

You reckon Wlad would have had the balls to stand in punching range without holding and leaning?

Also, conversly. The uppercut that Lewis landed in the 5th would have put Wlad to sleep.

We all know its more important to be tough than hit hard.

---

The right came after they had broken up from a clinch. So yeah Wlad would be in a position to catch him with it.

The uppercut in the 5th is irrelevant. Cuz there would be no 5th if it was Wlad who landed in the 2nd

I don't rank him in top ten but he is obviously a very skilled guy. Much more than Vitali I believe but I'd much rather watch Vitali fight. Vitalis nerve is a step above. Latley I get the feel if you've seen one Wlad match you've seen them all and while he cannot be faulted for this generation or uncertain talent pool I think he is guilty of 'running up the numbers' in a few recently. I put little stock in quantity over quality or numbers for the sake of numbers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

I don't rank him in top ten but he is obviously a very skilled guy. Much more than Vitali I believe but I'd much rather watch Vitali fight. Vitalis nerve is a step above. Latley I get the feel if you've seen one Wlad match you've seen them all and while he cannot be faulted for this generation or uncertain talent pool I think he is guilty of 'running up the numbers' in a few recently. I put little stock in quantity over quality or numbers for the sake of numbers.

---

So true. The how its won is much bigger then the win specifically here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

Asides the fact that styles make fights? Well you cannot undo accomplishments with defeats. Is Roy Jones any less HOFer and a great SMW because he lost to Allen Green?

---

What has Wlad acomplished?

Hes not ever been the undisputed champ and he's not even a better fighter than Corrie Sanders and his brother would have beaten him up.

---

Wlad and Vitali have said they will never fight , so how can he be undisputed champ while they are both active ?

---

Vitali gives up his belt or retires, fucking simple!

They wont. If one loses the other still has a grip for their promotions.

---

Both are active so for the past many years he cant be undisputed champ , as for "simple" Vitali should retire ? Im sure Vitali will choose to retire when he feels he wants to , what that has got to do with Wlad's career I have no idea.
Vitali may be Wlad's brother but he makes his own choices im sure.
So your comment " fucking simple " is not simple is it ross ?
Now NVSemin he is simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

Asides the fact that styles make fights? Well you cannot undo accomplishments with defeats. Is Roy Jones any less HOFer and a great SMW because he lost to Allen Green?

---

What has Wlad acomplished?

Hes not ever been the undisputed champ and he's not even a better fighter than Corrie Sanders and his brother would have beaten him up.

---

Wlad and Vitali have said they will never fight , so how can he be undisputed champ while they are both active ?

---

Vitali gives up his belt or retires, fucking simple!

They wont. If one loses the other still has a grip for their promotions.

---

Both are active so for the past many years he cant be undisputed champ , as for "simple" Vitali should retire ? Im sure Vitali will choose to retire when he feels he wants to , what that has got to do with Wlad's career I have no idea.
Vitali may be Wlad's brother but he makes his own choices im sure.
So your comment " fucking simple " is not simple is it ross ?
Now NVSemin he is simple.

---

If Vitali doesnt retire, there is always someone around who would beat Wlad. If they dont ever fight, Wlad can never be remembered as the best of this era.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

Asides the fact that styles make fights? Well you cannot undo accomplishments with defeats. Is Roy Jones any less HOFer and a great SMW because he lost to Allen Green?

---

What has Wlad acomplished?

Hes not ever been the undisputed champ and he's not even a better fighter than Corrie Sanders and his brother would have beaten him up.

---

Wlad and Vitali have said they will never fight , so how can he be undisputed champ while they are both active ?

---

Vitali gives up his belt or retires, fucking simple!

They wont. If one loses the other still has a grip for their promotions.

---

Both are active so for the past many years he cant be undisputed champ , as for "simple" Vitali should retire ? Im sure Vitali will choose to retire when he feels he wants to , what that has got to do with Wlad's career I have no idea.
Vitali may be Wlad's brother but he makes his own choices im sure.
So your comment " fucking simple " is not simple is it ross ?
Now NVSemin he is simple.

---

If Vitali doesnt retire, there is always someone around who would beat Wlad. If they dont ever fight, Wlad can never be remembered as the best of this era.

---

I don't disagree with that at all. but its silly to say " simple " Vitali retires like its Wlad's choice.

So you rank Vitali higher than Wlad?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

So you rank Vitali higher than Wlad?

---

That is a difficult question, as they have never fought , however do I think Vitali would beat Wlad prime for prime , who has the better legacy well that is up for debate.
Wlad is a bit like my favourite boxer Tommy Hearns , he can dominate certain fighters with ease , however some fighters styles are just a nightmare for them , and they lose brutally.

i do agree that vitali being around hurts wlads legacy. i too agree that vitali beat wlad.

i do want to hear peoples reasoning for wlad being in the top 10 though because i literally cant think of a reason, even if i were giving him the benefit of the doubt, that he would be top 10. maybe people just arent familiar with the history of HW boxing. and thats not meant to be an insult, its just an observation.

and i totally disagree that wlad would give any HW a good fight. i could name a lot of HWs that i think would easily dismantle him. i think he hits hard obviously and has good basic fundamentals, but to be a top fighter, you have to be able to handle diversity well which wlad hasnt been able to do in his career. he folds under pressure.

I could squeeze Wlad in at 11-15.

It's all the more impressive because he has a weak chin, but has developed ways to not get hit a lot.


But I don't see him top ten.

A young George Foreman walks through him, same with Tyson, I don't see him lasting a round with those 2.

But you can make a argument for him against people like Fraizer, Marciano, Dempsey, due to his size advantages.

people tell me there is rule bending throught the history of the HW division and the champ often gets away with a lot which i can understand

wlad does an outragious amount of rule bending that multiplies lots and lots when he is in with someone dangerous

there is clearly money driven corruption going on, for this reason i find it hard to place him

i personally dont think he would still be champ if made to fight anywhere near within the rules

he was clearly a high level contender in that generation of when he became champ (prior to the excessive rule bending obviously) tho

Being the "Klitschkos" instead of individuals greatly hurts their position in history. Unless you allow them to be boxings first ever tag-team?

Since 2008, when Vitali came back from retirement, the brothers have been rated as the top two at heavyweight. During this time they've had 20 fights between them with just ONE common opponent. 19 different challengers.

How can you establish a pecking order of the worlds best heavyweights if the top two are facing completely different opposition?

It's farcical enough that you can crown a champion without him beating his most strongest rival, let alone having virtually no formlines to compare, because they might as well be operating in different divisions.

There are always questions that arise when considering greatness. Are we pitting greats vs greats or are we looking solely at records and what has been accomplished during their eras or are we doing a mix of the two. Also one HAS to consider the fact that there used to only be 1 belt and now there's a billion of them and it makes it difficult to compare and contrast title holders because you don't fight the exact same competition if you have the WBC belt or IBF belt or WBA belt. To his credit Wladimir did make the WBO a LEGITIMATE heavyweight title based on his performances as it's champion.

This is why Joe Louis is ALWAYS my A#1 Greatest Heavyweight Champion of All-Time. He fought anyone and everyone, he fought quality AND quantity, and he had the longest run as Champion AND he had years of his prime taken away due to World War II (which nobody ever mentions the way they mention Ali's layoff).

Now looking at Wladimir, he's a flawed heavyweight. He has had losses, but everyone (bar Marciano) on the list of Greats has suffered losses. Some shocking like Lewis-Rahman I, some understandable Ali-Frazier I or Tyson-Holyfield, and some were just bad calls Lewis-Holyfield I & II. Wlad's defeats were shocking, but all the more shocking is his ability to reinvent himself as a fighter, paper over the cracks in his game and become the dominant champion AFTER such shocking defeats...I mean the only other guys to get smacked down like Wlad did and bounce back to become even more dominant are Joe Louis (Schmeling I) and Lennox Lewis (Oliver McCall I). Wlad has had a reign as champion longer than everyone but Joe Louis, he's now been in more title fights than Muhammad Ali, he's defended his titles 14 or so times, he has held the IBF, WBO and IBO Heavyweight Championships longer than any other fighter in history, and he has defended those titles more than any other fighter.

He is an all-time great based on his accomplishments during his era, to deny it is to deny history. He can only fight who is in his era, and he has been willing to fight them all. Is Wlad "The Greatest", no and I don't think anyone is making that case, but he IS an All-Time great, there's very little to argue about when considering that just given the stats he has. He fights all the time, he defends his titles, he's undefeated in rematches, he wins by KO/TKO more often than not, what more do you want? Maybe he could fight in a more exciting manner, but shit if you're winning why change something that is working? Nobody asks Hopkins or Mayweather Jr to change their styles.

I'd put Wlad in the top 10

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

There are always questions that arise when considering greatness. Are we pitting greats vs greats or are we looking solely at records and what has been accomplished during their eras or are we doing a mix of the two. Also one HAS to consider the fact that there used to only be 1 belt and now there's a billion of them and it makes it difficult to compare and contrast title holders because you don't fight the exact same competition if you have the WBC belt or IBF belt or WBA belt. To his credit Wladimir did make the WBO a LEGITIMATE heavyweight title based on his performances as it's champion.

This is why Joe Louis is ALWAYS my A#1 Greatest Heavyweight Champion of All-Time. He fought anyone and everyone, he fought quality AND quantity, and he had the longest run as Champion AND he had years of his prime taken away due to World War II (which nobody ever mentions the way they mention Ali's layoff).

Now looking at Wladimir, he's a flawed heavyweight. He has had losses, but everyone (bar Marciano) on the list of Greats has suffered losses. Some shocking like Lewis-Rahman I, some understandable Ali-Frazier I or Tyson-Holyfield, and some were just bad calls Lewis-Holyfield I & II. Wlad's defeats were shocking, but all the more shocking is his ability to reinvent himself as a wrestler, paper over the cracks in his game and become the dominant champion AFTER such shocking defeats...I mean the only other guys to get smacked down like Wlad did and bounce back to become even more dominant are Joe Louis (Schmeling I) and Lennox Lewis (Oliver McCall I). Wlad has had a reign as champion longer than everyone but Joe Louis, he's now been in more title fights than Muhammad Ali, he's defended his titles 14 or so times, he has held the IBF, WBO and IBO Heavyweight Championships longer than any other fighter in history, and he has defended those titles more than any other fighter.

He is an all-time great based on his accomplishments during his era, to deny it is to deny history. He can only fight who is in his era, and he has been willing to fight them all. Is Wlad "The Greatest", no and I don't think anyone is making that case, but he IS an All-Time great, there's very little to argue about when considering that just given the stats he has. He fights all the time, he defends his titles, he's undefeated in rematches, he wins by KO/TKO more often than not, what more do you want? Maybe he could fight in a more exciting manner, but shit if you're winning why change something that is working? Nobody asks Hopkins or Mayweather Jr to change their styles.

I'd put Wlad in the top 10

---

just one littel ammendment, other than that well done

Are we talking about Head to Head or accomplishments?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Are we talking about Head to Head or accomplishments?

---

Either way he's up there. Can't argue with how good he is. If he was as shit as people like erics44 say he is then he would have been beaten a long time ago and never returned to prominence

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

There are always questions that arise when considering greatness. Are we pitting greats vs greats or are we looking solely at records and what has been accomplished during their eras or are we doing a mix of the two. Also one HAS to consider the fact that there used to only be 1 belt and now there's a billion of them and it makes it difficult to compare and contrast title holders because you don't fight the exact same competition if you have the WBC belt or IBF belt or WBA belt. To his credit Wladimir did make the WBO a LEGITIMATE heavyweight title based on his performances as it's champion.

This is why Joe Louis is ALWAYS my A#1 Greatest Heavyweight Champion of All-Time. He fought anyone and everyone, he fought quality AND quantity, and he had the longest run as Champion AND he had years of his prime taken away due to World War II (which nobody ever mentions the way they mention Ali's layoff).

Now looking at Wladimir, he's a flawed heavyweight. He has had losses, but everyone (bar Marciano) on the list of Greats has suffered losses. Some shocking like Lewis-Rahman I, some understandable Ali-Frazier I or Tyson-Holyfield, and some were just bad calls Lewis-Holyfield I & II. Wlad's defeats were shocking, but all the more shocking is his ability to reinvent himself as a fighter, paper over the cracks in his game and become the dominant champion AFTER such shocking defeats...I mean the only other guys to get smacked down like Wlad did and bounce back to become even more dominant are Joe Louis (Schmeling I) and Lennox Lewis (Oliver McCall I). Wlad has had a reign as champion longer than everyone but Joe Louis, he's now been in more title fights than Muhammad Ali, he's defended his titles 14 or so times, he has held the IBF, WBO and IBO Heavyweight Championships longer than any other fighter in history, and he has defended those titles more than any other fighter.

He is an all-time great based on his accomplishments during his era, to deny it is to deny history. He can only fight who is in his era, and he has been willing to fight them all. Is Wlad "The Greatest", no and I don't think anyone is making that case, but he IS an All-Time great, there's very little to argue about when considering that just given the stats he has. He fights all the time, he defends his titles, he's undefeated in rematches, he wins by KO/TKO more often than not, what more do you want? Maybe he could fight in a more exciting manner, but shit if you're winning why change something that is working? Nobody asks Hopkins or Mayweather Jr to change their styles.

I'd put Wlad in the top 10

---

Are you forgetting that Vitali is also fighting young undefeated boxers and dominating them?

What is your deffinition of dominating?

Mine in boxing is a fighter that fits everyone and beats everyone. Wlad hasnt fought everyone has he. Vitali is at least equally as good so how can Wlad be dominating? He isnt. Hes only one of 2 fighters that are hard to seperate apart from Vitali proving himself against Lewis and beating Sanders and not having to grab and lean which to me proves Vitali is the better fighter of the two.

Joe Calzaghe had a long u defeated run but he was only ever called dominant after he had taken out the other threats and proved he was the best in that division.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

There are always questions that arise when considering greatness. Are we pitting greats vs greats or are we looking solely at records and what has been accomplished during their eras or are we doing a mix of the two. Also one HAS to consider the fact that there used to only be 1 belt and now there's a billion of them and it makes it difficult to compare and contrast title holders because you don't fight the exact same competition if you have the WBC belt or IBF belt or WBA belt. To his credit Wladimir did make the WBO a LEGITIMATE heavyweight title based on his performances as it's champion.

This is why Joe Louis is ALWAYS my A#1 Greatest Heavyweight Champion of All-Time. He fought anyone and everyone, he fought quality AND quantity, and he had the longest run as Champion AND he had years of his prime taken away due to World War II (which nobody ever mentions the way they mention Ali's layoff).

Now looking at Wladimir, he's a flawed heavyweight. He has had losses, but everyone (bar Marciano) on the list of Greats has suffered losses. Some shocking like Lewis-Rahman I, some understandable Ali-Frazier I or Tyson-Holyfield, and some were just bad calls Lewis-Holyfield I & II. Wlad's defeats were shocking, but all the more shocking is his ability to reinvent himself as a fighter, paper over the cracks in his game and become the dominant champion AFTER such shocking defeats...I mean the only other guys to get smacked down like Wlad did and bounce back to become even more dominant are Joe Louis (Schmeling I) and Lennox Lewis (Oliver McCall I). Wlad has had a reign as champion longer than everyone but Joe Louis, he's now been in more title fights than Muhammad Ali, he's defended his titles 14 or so times, he has held the IBF, WBO and IBO Heavyweight Championships longer than any other fighter in history, and he has defended those titles more than any other fighter.

He is an all-time great based on his accomplishments during his era, to deny it is to deny history. He can only fight who is in his era, and he has been willing to fight them all. Is Wlad "The Greatest", no and I don't think anyone is making that case, but he IS an All-Time great, there's very little to argue about when considering that just given the stats he has. He fights all the time, he defends his titles, he's undefeated in rematches, he wins by KO/TKO more often than not, what more do you want? Maybe he could fight in a more exciting manner, but shit if you're winning why change something that is working? Nobody asks Hopkins or Mayweather Jr to change their styles.

I'd put Wlad in the top 10

---

Wlad is a champion in an era that his brother helped to dilute. He hasn't fought the best challengers, he's fought SOME of them. Vitali has fought the others.

Wlad enjoys a luxury virtually nobody else in history has, not only was he able to avoid the "next best guy," that guy has also helped wipe out top competition.

Alphabet defenses are irrelevant. Chris John has defended the "world" featherweight title a thousand times, will he go into history as an all-time great? No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freedom

Based on what he's done so far, where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the ATG heavyweights?

---

There are 2 ways of looking at 'what he has done so far'

1./ He has dominated the division for the best part of 10 years

2./ He has dominated the worst 10 years of HW in history, his best win is against Sam Peter, would is probably not top 100 all time HW and he has never beaten anybody that at least the top 40 HW of all time would not also have almost certainly beaten.

:-\

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Wlad is a champion in an era that his brother helped to dilute. He hasn't fought the best challengers, he's fought SOME of them. Vitali has fought the others.

Wlad enjoys a luxury virtually nobody else in history has, not only was he able to avoid the "next best guy," that guy has also helped wipe out top competition.

Alphabet defenses are irrelevant. Chris John has defended the "world" featherweight title a thousand times, will he go into history as an all-time great? No.

---

What luxury is there? Who has Vitali fought that Wlad would lose to? Sure we could bring Sanders up again, but #1 That was a long time ago and #2 Sanders is sadly dead so there's no hope for a rematch and redemption.

JC Gomez, Kevin Johnson, Cris Arreola, Derreck Chisora, Tomaz Adamek, Odlanier Solis, Albert Sosnowski, Shannon Briggs, Manuel Charr

Who in that group beats Wlad if you're so confident of your point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freedom

Based on what he's done so far, where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the ATG heavyweights?

---

There are 2 ways of looking at 'what he has done so far'

1./ He has dominated the division for the best part of 10 years

2./ He has dominated the worst 10 years of HW in history, his best win is against Sam Peter, would is probably not top 100 all time HW and he has never beaten anybody that at least the top 40 HW of all time would not also have almost certainly beaten.

:-\

---

I wouldn't call it that at all. Wlad has fought some very good opponents who will sadly never get the credit they deserve because boxing "fans" won't give them their due because they are spiteful and want to play up how great past champions were and never appreciate the present. Same shit happened with Lennox Lewis if you'll recall

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IamInuit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

I don't rank him in top ten but he is obviously a very skilled guy. Much more than Vitali I believe but I'd much rather watch Vitali fight. Vitalis nerve is a step above. Latley I get the feel if you've seen one Wlad match you've seen them all and while he cannot be faulted for this generation or uncertain talent pool I think he is guilty of 'running up the numbers' in a few recently. I put little stock in quantity over quality or numbers for the sake of numbers.

---

So true. The how its won is much bigger then the win specifically here.

---

I agree with you both, but with the kind of money the German promoters are throwing at him, how can he refuse?
If he started refusing opponents due to quality we would be calling him an idiot, cowardly or insane.
I don't like the way the guy fights but he has been fighting any beating everybody for years.
I put him in top 15. I just want to say this one last thing, the way Lennox handled Tyson, I don't think shorty gets anywhere near Wald.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Wlad is a champion in an era that his brother helped to dilute. He hasn't fought the best challengers, he's fought SOME of them. Vitali has fought the others.

Wlad enjoys a luxury virtually nobody else in history has, not only was he able to avoid the "next best guy," that guy has also helped wipe out top competition.

Alphabet defenses are irrelevant. Chris John has defended the "world" featherweight title a thousand times, will he go into history as an all-time great? No.

---

What luxury is there? Who has Vitali fought that Wlad would lose to? Sure we could bring Sanders up again, but #1 That was a long time ago and #2 Sanders is sadly dead so there's no hope for a rematch and redemption.

JC Gomez, Kevin Johnson, Cris Arreola, Derreck Chisora, Tomaz Adamek, Odlanier Solis, Albert Sosnowski, Shannon Briggs, Manuel Charr

Who in that group beats Wlad if you're so confident of your point?

---

Some of those guys have been ranked much higher, and considered much better, than some of Wlad's opponents over the past 5/6 years. That is a fact. Therefore, Wlad would have been expected to face some of them if Vitali wasn't around to do the job for him.

Whether or not you believe Wlad would have beat those guys is irrelevant. If Wlad had never faced Corrie Sanders and I now claimed Sanders would smash him to bits inside two rounds you'd call me a moron.

Were the last ten years really the worst heavyweight era ever in the heavyweight division? I'm not sure that is true. Certainly, I agree that it isn't a good one. I don't think we'll ever see another good one either.

Will David Haye make the Hall of Fame? Is he Wladimir's best opponent?

I have Wladimir in the top 15 and his career isn't over.

The difference with Chris John is that during this era there have been many great featherweights that John hasn't faced. Gamboa, Garcia, Salido, JuanMa, the list goes on. Point is that there have been many other featherweights that many people considered The Man. In Wladimir's era of heavyweights, other than Haye, only his brother is someone that people considered The Man. And in Wladimir's defense, he completely outclassed Haye.

Are Gamboa, Garcia, Salido and JuanMa in a p4p sense equivalent to Povetkin, Chagaev, Ibramigov etc.?

I actually think we'll get to see Wladimir face Arreola and Chisora at some point. The rest of the guys don't pose any threat, at least subjectively.

For the people who rank Wladimir and Vitali outside the top 25 heavyweights, can you put up a list of 25 heavyweights that you would rank higher?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freedom

Based on what he's done so far, where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the ATG heavyweights?

---

There are 2 ways of looking at 'what he has done so far'

1./ He has dominated the division for the best part of 10 years

2./ He has dominated the worst 10 years of HW in history, his best win is against Sam Peter, would is probably not top 100 all time HW and he has never beaten anybody that at least the top 40 HW of all time would not also have almost certainly beaten.

:-\

---

No! No he hasnt!

Everyone is forgetting that there is another heavyweight champion who Wlad refuses to fight and would also not beat.

How can you dominate if there is another fighter regarded as a genuine world champion and who most feel would beat you?

In fact, put it this way...

If Wlad and Vitali were not brothers but had both been world champions for the last 5 years, would you still think Wlad has dominated?

Would you be annoyed that they have avoided each other? Who would you think wins based on their previous fights like Vitali giving Lewis his hardest fight and beating the man that smashed Wlad and then how vulnerable Wlad looks against punchers.

Would you even be singing Wlads praises?

Do you think Sven Ottke dominated the super middle division?

I went for 16-25. On achievement on paper, Wlad is much higher, but taking into consideration opponents and the nature of his defeats, I can't put him higher than that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Do you think Sven Ottke dominated the super middle division?

---

Chris John and now Sven Ottke. You're comparing Wladimir to these boxers who ACTIVELY avoid testing themselves against the best just because Vitali is around? You're going to drop a fighter out of greatness because he won't fight his brother, but alright I'll play that game with you. George Foreman never fought Earnie Shavers, Mike Tyson never fought: Riddick Bowe, Tommy Morrison, Michael Moorer, George Foreman, or Ray Mercer. Evander Holyfield never fought Andrew Golota or Donovan Ruddock or Tommy Morrison, Lennox Lewis never fought: Wlad, John Ruiz, or Chris Byrd. Roy Jones Jr never fought: Eubank, Benn, McClellan, Collins, Ottke, Michalzswski. Shane Mosley never fought Trinidad. Joe Frazier never fought Norton or Lyle. Are those fighters any less great because there's a name or two that's not on their records?

Wlad and Vitali are brothers, they won't fight each other we never expected JMM and Rafael to fight each other or the Quarry brothers or anyone else. If Vitali wasn't Wlad's brother they WOULD fight of course, but this idea that brothers ruling a division makes it "easier" is bullshit. 1 of them is in the ring at a time, they both have won consistently and decisively.

I think with certain posters Wlad will never be accepted as great because they have a huge chip on their shoulder either about his fighting style or his brother being a great fighter too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Do you think Sven Ottke dominated the super middle division?

---

Chris John and now Sven Ottke. You're comparing Wladimir to these boxers who ACTIVELY avoid testing themselves against the best just because Vitali is around? You're going to drop a fighter out of greatness because he won't fight his brother, but alright I'll play that game with you. George Foreman never fought Earnie Shavers, Mike Tyson never fought: Riddick Bowe, Tommy Morrison, Michael Moorer, George Foreman, or Ray Mercer. Evander Holyfield never fought Andrew Golota or Donovan Ruddock or Tommy Morrison, Lennox Lewis never fought: Wlad, John Ruiz, or Chris Byrd. Roy Jones Jr never fought: Eubank, Benn, McClellan, Collins, Ottke, Michalzswski. Shane Mosley never fought Trinidad. Joe Frazier never fought Norton or Lyle. Are those fighters any less great because there's a name or two that's not on their records?

Wlad and Vitali are brothers, they won't fight each other we never expected JMM and Rafael to fight each other or the Quarry brothers or anyone else. If Vitali wasn't Wlad's brother they WOULD fight of course, but this idea that brothers ruling a division makes it "easier" is bullshit. 1 of them is in the ring at a time, they both have won consistently and decisively.

I think with certain posters Wlad will never be accepted as great because they have a huge chip on their shoulder either about his fighting style or his brother being a great fighter too.

---

Wlad has an element of greatness, depending on how low your expectations are for a great fighter;D

My whole point is that at no point in Wladamirs career has he been dominant. You know that as well.

Like I said. What would your opinion on Wlads standing be if Vitali wasnt his brother but he was still a fellow title holder for the past 5 years and one that beat someone who had just smashed Wlad to bits.

It would be exactly the same as someone giving massive credit to Ottke. Calzaghe would have the same criticisms if he hadnt puncuated his super middle reign, unifying against Lacy and Kessler to become the undisputed champ and having beaten the other top fighters.

George Foreman was never dominant! He only made 2 defences!

Your amike Tyson point is an absolute joke because Mike epitomised dominance during his reign. Yes he got beat but before that he was the most dominant fighter on the planet, beating everyone that was anyone in the heavyweight division, winning and defending all 3 belts 7 times.

Holyfield or Lewis id never have said were ever dominating the division because iv said it before, they got beat or avoided fighters. People always call for another Tyson because he truly ruled the division and was THE one and only champ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Your amike Tyson point is an absolute joke because Mike epitomised dominance during his reign.

---

Not just beaten by Buster Douglas, SCHOOLED for 10 rounds by Buster Douglas. It's 1 thing to get caught hard and KO'd it's quite another to just get absolutely dominated. And Buster never made 1 successful title defense....NOT....A......ONE.

But you just keep fighting the truth bud

Lyle, come back to me when Wlad has made 6 successfull defences of all 3 belts and there is no other fighter active that anyone thinks would beat him.

Get real!

"Wlad is the greatest heavy out there right now"

What about Vitali?

"He doesnt count"

:p

Evander Holyfeild avoided people are you high ross he fought damn near ever fucking fighter he could. As for the era Tyson ruled is as weak as this one damn near and he fucking lost to Buster Douglas at 40 to 10 to win the thing. People say this era is weak but i am sure it beats any thing form 1900 to 1960. There was the 70's and 90's they are the gold ages alright this time looks bad because it followed the 90's. I think if Wald keeps winning he will get in the top ten i have to see how it all ends for him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Lyle, come back to me when Wlad has made 6 successfull defences of all 3 belts and there is no other fighter active that anyone thinks would beat you.

Get real!

"Wlad is the greatest heavy out there right now"

What about Vitali?

"He doesnt count"

:p

---

THE.....BROTHERS.....WILL.......NOT.......FIGHT... ...EACH.....OTHER

How many more times must it be said? How many different ways? Do I need to translate it for you?

So the ONLY reason Wlad isn't considered great to you is because Vitali?

You recall the IBF title right? The title Tyson won off of Tony Tucker, the title he defended 7 times until his defeat to James 'Buster' Douglas. Yeah, well see Wlad has defended THAT title 15 times. That's DOUBLE what Tyson did +1 to grow on...but you were saying about Tyson?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr140

Evander Holyfeild avoided people are you high ross he fought damn near ever fucking fighter he could. As for the era Tyson ruled is as weak as this one damn near and he fucking lost to Buster Douglas at 40 to 10 to win the thing. People say this era is weak but i am sure it beats any thing form 1900 to 1960. There was the 70's and 90's they are the gold ages alright this time looks bad because it followed the 90's. I think if Wald keeps winning he will get in the top ten i have to see how it all ends for him.

---

I didnt say specifically that Holyfield avoided fighters, said Lewis and Holyfield avoided fighters and got beat, between the two of them they never had a long extended period of dominance where noone else could be regarded as a champ.

Lewis avoided Byrd, even dropped his title to fight Kirk Johnson instead;D

No one else since Tyson has had that many fights while being the undisputed heavyweight champ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr140

There was the 70's and 90's they are the gold ages alright this time looks bad because it followed the 90's. I

---

And how did Mr. Tyson fair in the 1990's? He was at MOST the 3rd best fighter of that era, perhaps 4th with Lennox, Holyfield, and Bowe to contend with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Wlad's peak years have come since he had Manny Steward as trainer. As for "He has never been the generally recognized Heavyweight Champion of the World" that's bullcrap and you know it. Also this "The era is weak" #1 Wlad has 0 control over how good whoever he fights is and #2 Other fighters have had weak eras and haven't accomplished what he has.

---

Wlad has never been the generally recognized champ, I stand by that, as he has never fought Vitali.

And yes Wlad is involved in a weak era, that he has no control of. But as you mentioned, other fighters, particularly Heavyweights got over that handicap, and did not let be an excuse at the end of their career. Wlad has lacked the ability of others in that department.