Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
I think if Holmes and Tyson eras were better it was by like barely nothing. I would say Bryde and even Haye could beat those names that you have mention more likely Bryde. I still stick by that this Era is better then any thing from the 1900s to the 1950s. I can agree with some of what you say and i may be overrating this era but i think people are underrating it alot more then people overating it. When people are saying that fighters from the old old era are better then now i think its kinda bullshit.
Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BIG H
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
imp
Deontay wilder (as green as he is right now!) will cause wlad nightmares.
Wlad hates to fight.
Theres no way Wlad will risk fighting this type of opponent...please Wlad, prove me wrong.
Is there an argument that Wlad hasn't fought every single person out there? He's literally cleaned out the division of contenders. The issue is just that the contenders of his time aren't that great on a historical scale.
are the contenders that bad? or is wlad just that much better than them that they are portrayed as being so bad
if ali was around today with his mouth and in much closer fights with fighters much more like his size and avoiding the draft for a war on communism in a country far far away would this era be remembered as fondly as the era Ali was actually around?
You can defend most eras to a degree, but not this one!! It's the wrost in history, worst than the 'Bum of the month' days!
im not defending the era
its very crap, but that is mainly due to charactors and not skill
wlad is the worlds most boring man outside the ring
he has actually improved inside the ring, he's a bit more interesting nowadays
outside the ring he is very very dull tho
thats why the era is rubbish
if tyson was winning every fight like wlad is then the era would be seen as good
thing is tyson would always meet his buster douglas and it doesnt seem like wlad ever will
Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DavilaJones
Would you have him fight brother? Personally I don't think that's a good idea. Think of it this way, he would have to train, both of them in fact would have to train for 6 to 8 weeks for the sole purpose of beating up, roughing up and perhaps knocking out their brother who from all indications are very close to each other.
To beat up your own brother who love for money fame just doesn't sit well with me. However boxing is a cruel business and perhaps I'm sentimental in this regard.
No he shouldn't fight his brother, but at the same time you shouldn't just ignore the fact there's a top TWO instead of a no.1
Since 2008, when Vitali came back from retirement, the brothers have occupied the top two positions. During this time they've had 18 fights between them with just ONE common opponent. 17 different title challengers.
How can you establish a pecking order of the worlds best heavyweights if the top two are facing completely different opposition?
In this very thread @THE PHILOSOPHER is claiming Solis is better than Briggs and Rahman. Wlad has never even fought Solis, so if he is such a worthy challenger, then surely the no.1 of this era would have fought him? No but his brother did. Just like Wlad fought Haye but Vitali didn't. Vitali fought Adamek but Wlad didn't. Wlad fought Chagaev but Vitali didn't. Vitali fought Arreola but Wlad didn't.
They might as well be competing in two completely different divisions. There isn't a clear no.1 heavyweight champion and there's no clear line of top challengers.
The Klitschko's are individuals and should be judged as such. Boxing is not a tag team sport.
Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
Quote:
In this very thread @
THE PHILOSOPHER is claiming Solis is better than Briggs and Rahman. Wlad has never even fought Solis, so if he is such a worthy challenger, then surely the no.1 of this era would have fought him? No but his brother did. Just like Wlad fought Haye but Vitali didn't. Vitali fought Adamek but Wlad didn't. Wlad fought Chagaev but Vitali didn't. Vitali fought Arreola but Wlad didn't.
I never stated Wlad has fought Solis! I only mentioned him when other posters brought VK into the thread discussion.
And yes Solis is way better than Briggs ever was.
Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
Quote:
In this very thread @
THE PHILOSOPHER is claiming Solis is better than Briggs and Rahman. Wlad has never even fought Solis, so if he is such a worthy challenger, then surely the no.1 of this era would have fought him? No but his brother did. Just like Wlad fought Haye but Vitali didn't. Vitali fought Adamek but Wlad didn't. Wlad fought Chagaev but Vitali didn't. Vitali fought Arreola but Wlad didn't.
I never stated Wlad has fought Solis! I only mentioned him when other posters brought VK into the thread discussion.
And yes Solis is way better than Briggs ever was.
he was winning till vitali knocked him out :)
Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE PHILOSOPHER
Quote:
In this very thread @
THE PHILOSOPHER is claiming Solis is better than Briggs and Rahman. Wlad has never even fought Solis, so if he is such a worthy challenger, then surely the no.1 of this era would have fought him? No but his brother did. Just like Wlad fought Haye but Vitali didn't. Vitali fought Adamek but Wlad didn't. Wlad fought Chagaev but Vitali didn't. Vitali fought Arreola but Wlad didn't.
I never stated Wlad has fought Solis! I only mentioned him when other posters brought VK into the thread discussion.
And yes Solis is way better than Briggs ever was.
The point is - you mentioned Solis as a good win for this era, however, the supposed no.1 didn't beat him his brother did.
The division has been diluted.
Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
I suggest 27 and only with a ref that supports clinching.
Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
I suggest 27 and only with a ref that supports clinching.
this is very true
following the rules wlad would have lost his title long ago
Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
imp
Wlad has every advantage against every heavyweight today but still cant come across with any balls in the ring.
He has a bit of audley blood with frank bruno style fighting with a hint of goloto.
@imp - frankly, Wlad and his brother as very comparable to Floyd Mayweather. I just don't see their competition as being that great. Thus, it's impossible to rank them all-time-great-level high. I can't put them in the top ten, but there's an argument for a top twenty spot. We'll never know how Wladimir would have fared against a prime Jack Sharkey or a prime Floyd Patterson. One thing I will say for Wladimir is that there hasn't been someone I've wanted him to face that he didn't eventually face, at least recently.
Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
imp
Wlad has every advantage against every heavyweight today but still cant come across with any balls in the ring.
He has a bit of audley blood with frank bruno style fighting with a hint of goloto.
Wladimir has a style that might bore, but it's effective. People have made that same claim for defensive fighters since the days of Gene Tunney.
Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
its effective against the mediocrity both brothers have faced since 2000. true.
Does anyone really think Jack Johnson or Joe Louis or Jack Dempsey for cryin out loud wouldnt utterly SMOKE these faggots in a few rounds?
Re: Where do you rank Wladimir Klitschko among the all-time heavyweights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
imp
Phil,
No one on this forum seems to put Wlad in the top ten.
vitali would always be better but what does that really tell you?
The brothers are great guys and good champions but unfortunately not as fantastic as you make out.
i dissagree on a few points
Quote:
Originally Posted by
imp
No one on this forum seems to put Wlad in the top ten.
there are a few that do including me, i would say top 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by
imp
vitali would always be better but what does that really tell you?
im not sure that is true anymore, peak for peak i think it would be a very close fight, i even slightly favour wlad now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
imp
The brothers are great guys and good champions but unfortunately not as fantastic as you make out.
they arent great guys, they have ruined the HW division with their slave contracts, never fighting out of germany, spoiling tactics, dodgy refs and extremely boring personalites
