Joe frazier (rip) would be the smallest opponent wlad....

Joe Frazier is smaller than Chris Byrd and Eddie Chambers in all aspect's. His average prime weight was 205lbs, he had a reach of 73″ and was barely 5'11"! At 215lbs he looked badly out of shape:

http://www.nytstore.com/assets/image...APNL5_EXTR.jpg

Even the 216lb, former CW Jean Marc Mormeck wore the weight well:

http://letstalkfighting.com/wp-conte...ir-mormeck.jpg

How would he fare against the Klitschko's? Disregard (for now) the fact that he would be unable to fight today on medical grounds due to being blind in his left eye throughout his entire career and give me your thoughts on a Klitschko vs. Frazier showdown!

I know size is not neccessarily an indicator of outcome but with margin's like that they have to factor in surely! Especially considering Joe unlike i.e 215lb Chris Byrd wasn't the slickest or most agile of fighters!

Personally i think George Foreman put Frazier there where he objectively belongs. When Joe Frazier met the only heavyweight comparable to Klitschko i.e Foreman (And even then foreman is a much smaller HW than wlad!) he was violently schooled!

His reputation as a puncher and for punch-resistance is based on fighting cruiserweights and he would be a very good cruiserweight if he was around today. However, it's not merely the fact that he lost to George Foreman that is significant but the margin and manner of the defeat. Thanks to his incompetent cornermen and the equally useless referee, Joe Frazier was lucky to leave Jamaica alive in 1973. Given his slow starting and the regularity with which he took punches, he'd be in desperate trouble against any decent sized, big punching genuine heavyweight of today (See Bonavena and Bugner fights! Not a good sign...)

I am a frazier fan and he will be missed, He had the heart to keep fighting and never give up no matter what but in truth Klitschko vs. Ali's arch nemesis would be a missmatch..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE PHILOSOPHER

Joe Frazier is smaller than Chris Byrd and Eddie Chambers in all aspect's. His average prime weight was 205lbs, he had a reach of 73″ and was barely 5'11"! At 215lbs he looked badly out of shape:

http://www.nytstore.com/assets/image...APNL5_EXTR.jpg

Even the 216lb, former CW Jean Marc Mormeck wore the weight well:

http://letstalkfighting.com/wp-conte...ir-mormeck.jpg

How would he fare against the Klitschko's? Disregard (for now) the fact that he would be unable to fight today on medical grounds due to being blind in his left eye throughout his entire career and give me your thoughts on a Klitschko vs. Frazier showdown!

I know size is not neccessarily an indicator of outcome but with margin's like that they have to factor in surely! Especially considering Joe unlike i.e 215lb Chris Byrd wasn't the slickest or most agile of fighters!

Personally i think George Foreman put Frazier there where he objectively belongs. When Joe Frazier met the only heavyweight comparable to Klitschko i.e Foreman (And even then foreman is a much smaller HW than wlad!) he was violently schooled!

His reputation as a puncher and for punch-resistance is based on fighting cruiserweights and he would be a very good cruiserweight if he was around today. However, it's not merely the fact that he lost to George Foreman that is significant but the margin and manner of the defeat. Thanks to his incompetent cornermen and the equally useless referee, Joe Frazier was lucky to leave Jamaica alive in 1973. Given his slow starting and the regularity with which he took punches, he'd be in desperate trouble against any decent sized, big punching genuine heavyweight of today (See Bonavena and Bugner fights! Not a good sign...)

Has ever faced! That is very telling...I am a frazier fan and he will be missed, He had the heart to keep fighting and never give up no matter what but in truth Klitschko vs. Ali's arch nemesis would be a missmatch..

---

Hey! If you want a discussion you have to leave something for the other person to say. You just killed this thread with your opening post. All I can say is I agree.

The difference between a similiar size Byrd and Chambers is they might as well have been throwing hamsters at Wlad compared to Frazier. Likewise Foremans mentality vs Frazier, regardless of hearing him always say "my knees were shaking" bit...was hell bent on destroying Joe and fought zero and nothing like Wlad in first career.

Style wise Wlad has all the tools to keep Frazier on a stick for win but I wonder if he would be content there and let a forever tenacious and coiled dynamite Frazier linger and avoid Fraziers danger zone. To me Wlad would have to get him out and punch much more off jab. 205 or 502 I don't doubt for a minute Frazier could hurt Wlad but I say Wlad beats him.

Probably the only fighter 'size wise' comparable to frazier is mormeck, And even then mormeck has a naturally bigger/more athletic frame than frazier had!

Chambers and byrd are slightly bigger men than frazier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE PHILOSOPHER

Probably the only fighter 'size wise' comparable to frazier is mormeck, And even then mormeck has a naturally bigger/more athletic frame than frazier had!

Chambers and byrd are slightly bigger men than frazier.

---

in Frazier's defense, neither Klitschko has the one punch power of Foreman

not saying they don't bang, but neither is as big of a puncher as Big George, also Frazier had more power than Mormeck, better head movement, stamina, and the tightest compact left hook in HW history, Wlad should be the favorite, but if Haye was given a chance by more than a few there is no way in hell that you would be able to count Joe Frazier out of pulling off the win

Quote:

---

in Frazier's defense, neither Klitschko has the one punch power of Foreman

---

Mate seriously....come on!

George Foreman was INDEED one of the hardest punchers and his KO abilities are very good. He probably is a harder puncher in a 'P4P' sense....but to suggest he is more powerful than either 245lb brother is just silly! Prime foreman was considered the SHW of his day! Today he would an be average sized HW no bigger tha haye or adamek!

His power looked more impressive because he was fighting mainly smaller men....i mean he couldn't even KO china chinned morrison! Foreman and Wlad had 3 common opponents: Schulz, Martin and Young:

Opponent-Wladimir Klitschko's result-George Foreman's result:

·Axel Schulz KO8 MD12 (Robbery)
·Everett Martin KO8 UD10
·Mark Young KO2 (RTD2) TKO7

This shows a clear power superiority of Wladimir. This was the comeback foreman of course but his power had not diminishished.

Adittionally note that 13 people survived fights with Foreman. But only 3 survived against Wlad.

Prime George Foreman (median weight 217 lbs) would be Wladimir Klitschko's bottom-10 LIGHTEST opponent EVER and Vitali Klitschko's bottom-3 LIGHTEST opponent!

Probably the easiest way to convince good-old-time nostalgists of the superiority of Klitschko (compared to Foreman) is to mention that George Foreman has scored only 3 KOs in world championship fights 200×2, whereas Wladimir Klitschko has scored approximately 5 times as many.

Thankyou.

Athletes in boxing today are vastly superior to the old timers in most cases:

http://www.midwestsportsfans.com/wp-...hammad-ali.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/...00_634x461.jpg

Yes they sometimes may not be as entertaining as the 'good old days' and less willing to risk there health etc but then again it is 2012. Boxers are more scientific nowadays, the training and nutrition has moved on, but yes u can't fault the old timers for heart and guts!

What next, a "Floyd Patterson vs. Wlad" thread?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE PHILOSOPHER

Probably the only fighter 'size wise' comparable to frazier is mormeck, And even then mormeck has a naturally bigger/more athletic frame than frazier had!

Chambers and byrd are slightly bigger men than frazier.

---

in Frazier's defense, neither Klitschko has the one punch power of Foreman

not saying they don't bang, but neither is as big of a puncher as Big George, also Frazier had more power than Mormeck, better head movement, stamina, and the tightest compact left hook in HW history, Wlad should be the favorite, but if Haye was given a chance by more than a few there is no way in hell that you would be able to count Joe Frazier out of pulling off the win

---

All empiric evidence shows that especially Wlad has a much harder one punch power than Big George - but of course Foreman is from a past time and therefore better.... - everything has developed since the 60s except boxing.... :-D

Wlad vs. JF would be a mismatch as most matches with today's HWs vs. yesterdays HWs. In 30-40 years people will also claim that if their present HWs fought the K2 then they would lose. Of course K2 would not be able to compete with future HW greats. One could be great in his own era but one would also be non-competitive going 4-5 sports generations forward. Better nutrition, genetic, tactics, training regimes etc. etc. - the evolution race will never stop even though many posters think that boxing is static.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Plys 44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE PHILOSOPHER

Probably the only fighter 'size wise' comparable to frazier is mormeck, And even then mormeck has a naturally bigger/more athletic frame than frazier had!

Chambers and byrd are slightly bigger men than frazier.

---

in Frazier's defense, neither Klitschko has the one punch power of Foreman

not saying they don't bang, but neither is as big of a puncher as Big George, also Frazier had more power than Mormeck, better head movement, stamina, and the tightest compact left hook in HW history, Wlad should be the favorite, but if Haye was given a chance by more than a few there is no way in hell that you would be able to count Joe Frazier out of pulling off the win

---

All empiric evidence shows that especially Wlad has a much harder one punch power than Big George - but of course Foreman is from a past time and therefore better.... - everything has developed since the 60s except boxing.... :-D

Wlad vs. JF would be a mismatch as most matches with today's HWs vs. yesterdays HWs. In 30-40 years people will also claim that if their present HWs fought the K2 then they would lose. Of course K2 would not be able to compete with future HW greats. One could be great in his own era but one would also be non-competitive going 4-5 sports generations forward. Better nutrition, genetic, tactics, training regimes etc. etc. - the evolution race will never stop even though many posters think that boxing is static.

---

to Philosopher, all the common opponents that Wlad and George had were opponents old 40+ yr old George took on, and sorry but most the guys that Wlad has beaten are roughly the same size as the guys that Foreman took on in his comeback and George more often than not had one punch KO victories over these guys while being fat out of shape and having a big age disadvantage, because back in the 80's and 90's the average age of real HW contenders wasn't mid 30's, just cause they have better physiques than the HW fighters of the past doesn't mean they possess better skills or overall better technique, if that was the case than Holyfield would take the cake cause IMO he still comes in more physically fit than men 20 yrs younger than him

Quote:

---

all the common opponents that Wlad and George had were opponents old 40+ yr old George took on

---

I already stated that didn't i? On a more consistant basis wlad has fought much larger opponents! George's best win was former LHW moorer in a fight he was getting schooled, moorer barely beat average axel schultz managing only a SD, he was also kayoed in 1 by tua!

The cooney fight was an embarrasment that should never have happened it is basically the equivalent of tyson fighting bowe now!!
Imagine the shit this division would get if that happened! Foreman also struggled with a young-overly cautious shannon briggs so we can discount that version ruling todays era of hw's!

George # 2 was far more focused on lasting the 12 rounds which is the best way to train. He wasn't as wild, concentrated more on setting up his punches and not just charging and swing away. I do believe the George Foreman of 1973 vs. Frazier, would probably have beat George #2 but...

The later version was a better more patient boxer. The early George was a slugger who if he did not knock someone out in 3 or 4 rounds got extremely frustrated. He went the distance with Holyfield on April 19 1991 and actually had more left than Holyfield even at the 42. Early on he was a one dimensional puncher and a bully. The later version was better. Also his demeanor was much better the early George was a bitter angry man.

Power is the last thing to go in a fighters arsenal,foreman focused on this rather than any other aspect of his training in his comeback, watch the legendary nights documentary and it will show him carrying like a dead animal (a big animal like a bear or somethin not that big though on his shoulders), then he wears this thing on his chest with a cable that's connected to a car and he pulls it....He does lot of weights, and lots of wood chopping....

BY GEORGE (his auto):"I never ran more than 3 miles a day in my first career but in the begining of my comeback i was doing mini - marithons of 5 or more miles", (the cow picture WAS a stunt for people mag. but the 2 guys helping foreman hold the cow fell down and left george actually holding the animal!)

Boxing Illustrated 12/95:in the old days I never hit the heavybag less than 6 rounds a day but no more than 8
The Fight by Norman mailer: says that while watching him train in zaire foreman would brood around and shadowbox for 20 minutes or so, do about 10 minutes of calethenics, then spar for 4 rounds, heavy bag for 15 minutes,then the speed bag for a round, then finish with a short stint on the rope and leave...(this was only a week or so before the fight and i am guessing a light workout?)

FROM GEORGES OLD COLUMN IN USA WEEKEND:"when i fought Fraizer in 73 and took off my robe everyone said "how can i get a stomach like that george? and the truth is/was i never did more than 100 sit-ups a day, "I looked at a photo of myself from the second Fraizer fight and thought my chest looked great and i remembered dick sadler always had me do my push ups 3 sets of 10 one with my hands in close, one at shoulder width, and one just passed shoulder width"." I never lifted weights much as a young man".

If im totally honest i think frazier makes foreman look better than he actually was....Don't get me wrong of course he was a great fighter with a big punch but when younger foreman beat Frazier, joe was out of shape, he prepared for the first Foreman fight by touring with a funk band. Foreman was a nobody at this point and Frazier didn't take him seriously at all. If Mike Tyson or some other "fan favorite" lost under these circumstances Frazier's poor preperation would be talked about to death.

Fraizer II-fought smarter but physically totally shot after Manilla.

Anyway to finish, foreman himself admits the klitschko's are better than him!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE PHILOSOPHER

Quote:

---

all the common opponents that Wlad and George had were opponents old 40+ yr old George took on

---

I already stated that didn't i? On a more consistant basis wlad has fought much larger opponents! George's best win was former LHW moorer in a fight he was getting schooled, moorer barely beat average axel schultz managing only a SD, he was also kayoed in 1 by tua!

The cooney fight was an embarrasment that should never have happened it is basically the equivalent of tyson fighting bowe now!!
Imagine the shit this division would get if that happened! Foreman also struggled with a young-overly cautious shannon briggs so we can discount that version ruling todays era of hw's!

George # 2 was far more focused on lasting the 12 rounds which is the best way to train. He wasn't as wild, concentrated more on setting up his punches and not just charging and swing away. I do believe the George Foreman of 1973 vs. Frazier, would probably have beat George #2 but...

The later version was a better more patient boxer. The early George was a slugger who if he did not knock someone out in 3 or 4 rounds got extremely frustrated. He went the distance with Holyfield on April 19 1991 and actually had more left than Holyfield even at the 42. Early on he was a one dimensional puncher and a bully. The later version was better. Also his demeanor was much better the early George was a bitter angry man.

Power is the last thing to go in a fighters arsenal,foreman focused on this rather than any other aspect of his training in his comeback, watch the legendary nights documentary and it will show him carrying like a dead animal (a big animal like a bear or somethin not that big though on his shoulders), then he wears this thing on his chest with a cable that's connected to a car and he pulls it....He does lot of weights, and lots of wood chopping....

BY GEORGE (his auto):"I never ran more than 3 miles a day in my first career but in the begining of my comeback i was doing mini - marithons of 5 or more miles", (the cow picture WAS a stunt for people mag. but the 2 guys helping foreman hold the cow fell down and left george actually holding the animal!)

Boxing Illustrated 12/95:in the old days I never hit the heavybag less than 6 rounds a day but no more than 8
The Fight by Norman mailer: says that while watching him train in zaire foreman would brood around and shadowbox for 20 minutes or so, do about 10 minutes of calethenics, then spar for 4 rounds, heavy bag for 15 minutes,then the speed bag for a round, then finish with a short stint on the rope and leave...(this was only a week or so before the fight and i am guessing a light workout?)

FROM GEORGES OLD COLUMN IN USA WEEKEND:"when i fought Fraizer in 73 and took off my robe everyone said "how can i get a stomach like that george? and the truth is/was i never did more than 100 sit-ups a day, "I looked at a photo of myself from the second Fraizer fight and thought my chest looked great and i remembered dick sadler always had me do my push ups 3 sets of 10 one with my hands in close, one at shoulder width, and one just passed shoulder width"." I never lifted weights much as a young man".

If im totally honest i think frazier makes foreman look better than he actually was....Don't get me wrong of course he was a great fighter with a big punch but when younger foreman beat Frazier, joe was out of shape, he prepared for the first Foreman fight by touring with a funk band. Foreman was a nobody at this point and Frazier didn't take him seriously at all. If Mike Tyson or some other "fan favorite" lost under these circumstances Frazier's poor preperation would be talked about to death.

Fraizer II-fought smarter but physically totally shot after Manilla.

Anyway to finish, foreman himself admits the klitschko's are better than him!

---

again Foreman was way passed it and ancient when he fought Briggs and he still beat him only to be robbed, also a completely focused George never lost to anyone the likes of Puritty, Sanders (RIP) , or Brewster, which were shorter, half an inch taller, and shorter than Foreman, so Big George being smaller wouldn't have been an issue given he would have an inch reach advantage and the sledgehammer jab followed by his jackhammer right hand

I'm not trying to bash either Klitschko cause I'm one of the few that does give them their dues, but don't try and discredit a legend like Frazier or Foreman only to try and build them both (especially in this case Wlad) up when it's a straight up FACT that they are fighting in one of the worst eras that the HW division has seen, it's not their fault but it still is a factor to their dominance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE PHILOSOPHER

Quote:

---

in Frazier's defense, neither Klitschko has the one punch power of Foreman

---

Mate seriously....come on!

George Foreman was INDEED one of the hardest punchers and his KO abilities are very good. He probably is a harder puncher in a 'P4P' sense....but to suggest he is more powerful than either 245lb brother is just silly! Prime foreman was considered the SHW of his day! Today he would an be average sized HW no bigger tha haye or adamek!

His power looked more impressive because he was fighting mainly smaller men....i mean he couldn't even KO china chinned morrison! Foreman and Wlad had 3 common
opponents: Schulz, Martin and Young:

Opponent-Wladimir Klitschko's result-George Foreman's result:

·Axel Schulz KO8 MD12 (Robbery)
·Everett Martin KO8 UD10
·Mark Young KO2 (RTD2) TKO7

This shows a clear power superiority of Wladimir. This was the comeback foreman of course but his power had not diminishished.

Adittionally note that 13 people survived fights with Foreman. But only 3 survived against Wlad.

Prime George Foreman (median weight 217 lbs) would be Wladimir Klitschko's bottom-10 LIGHTEST opponent EVER and Vitali Klitschko's bottom-3 LIGHTEST opponent!

Probably the easiest way to convince good-old-time nostalgists of the superiority of Klitschko (compared to Foreman) is to mention that George Foreman has scored only 3 KOs in world championship fights 200×2, whereas Wladimir Klitschko has scored approximately 5 times as many.

Thankyou.

---

I don't know for the life of me how you draw any clean cut superiority in trumping up names like a Mark Young and Bigfoot Martin. Who hasn't knocked Young out bud? By that logic everyones favorite punching bag Mike acey flattened him before both so is he in the neighborhood of big hitters? Wlad is so superior he had to fight Martin not once but twice to get him out. Considering Wlad had had about three times as many title fights, (excluding the wbu and stepping stone trinkets for both) than Foreman so yeh, obviously it would seem he would have more
kos. That's just loaded.

Both have a somewhat methodical and calculated delivery with power. Foreman has had two careers with it and came back as a mentally superior fighter he was in his youth. Wlad has seemingly done it likewise, matured, without the ten year absence. Both worked off jab and varied in delivery. Wlad has literally won fights on a jab and seemed content to do it and could paw it. I think he could do even better if he would let the right come off of it far more but he is ever the calculator. Foremans jab was a telephone pole follow usually with a debilitating uppercut or that half chop half cross. Power is great and all but when you think power you think hurt with nearly every clean shot landed. Foreman had that.

Its pretty obvious he wants to ignore that fact that this is the weakest heavyweight era of all time thats why he never brings it up.

Hindsight is a great thing.
Jack johnson is another oldie that gets destroyed by todays heavyweights as he only fought 20-30 rds back then.

Nathan cleverly is another fighter in the best lhw divison of all time and he schools a pre clinton woods roy jones.

Anyway, i cant talk long im fighting in germany next week as im over 200lbs and 6foot im a legitimate contender to the klitskos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imp

Its pretty obvious he wants to ignore that fact that this is the weakest heavyweight era of all time thats why he never brings it up.

Hindsight is a great thing.
Jack johnson is another oldie that gets destroyed by todays heavyweights as he only fought 20-30 rds back then.

Nathan cleverly is another fighter in the best lhw divison of all time and he schools a pre clinton woods roy jones.

Anyway, i cant talk long im fighting in germany next week as im over 200lbs and 6foot im a legitimate contender to the klitskos.

---

Have they moved on to fighting retards then??? I guess that's what happens when you dominate a division so thoroughly.

This is a bit silly. Haye, Wlad and Vitali look like bodybuilders but that is not what puts power in their punches or provides evidence of stamina and physical fitness. There are many unfit bodybuilders who have little stamina and physical fitness and many other less ripped guys who have greater cardio fitness, resistance and staying power. If you are going to include fighters from the past you then also have to afford them the same nutritional and scientific training methods used by boxers today and put more hunger into modern boxers who have way more distractions and competition when it comes to building a legacy than fighters from a bygone age had. It does not work. While it is true that many of us have a tendency to romanticise the past it is also apparent that many modern fight fans exaggerate the achievements of todays greatest.

Wlad and Vitali are huge. You have to factor that in. If you do that you can then not ignore that fact when you calculate their greatness. If none of the older heavyweights would be big enough to compete today then maybe it is also true that you can not berate them for it or attribute too much to the dominance of two brothers who nearly always enter the ring with a huge size and weight advantage over their opponents.

That said 6 times out of ten Joe stops Wlad and outpoints Vitali. ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

This is a bit silly. Haye, Wlad and Vitali look like bodybuilders but that is not what puts power in their punches or provides evidence of stamina and physical fitness. There are many unfit bodybuilders who have little stamina and physical fitness and many other less ripped guys who have greater cardio fitness, resistance and staying power. If you are going to include fighters from the past you then also have to afford them the same nutritional and scientific training methods used by boxers today and put more hunger into modern boxers who have way more distractions and competition when it comes to building a legacy than fighters from a bygone age had. It does not work. While it is true that many of us have a tendency to romanticise the past it is also apparent that many modern fight fans exaggerate the achievements of todays greatest.

Wlad and Vitali are huge. You have to factor that in. If you do that you can then not ignore that fact when you calculate their greatness. If none of the older heavyweights would be big enough to compete today then maybe it is also true that you can not berate them for it or attribute too much to the dominance of two brothers who nearly always enter the ring with a huge size and weight advantage over their opponents.

That said 6 times out of ten Joe stops Wlad and outpoints Vitali. ;D

---

If you want to compare two boxers than you just have to say boxer X year 2012 vs. boxer Y year 1970. All other factors are irrelevant if you want to compare two boxers across time. The only reason to mention size, nutrition and blah blah blah blah is if you want past boxers to be the best.

"Wlad and Vitali are huge. You have to factor that in" - why? Last time I read the rules there was no weight limit in the HW division. What do you mean by saying "factor that in"? Should K2 start down 1 points every rd. or what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imp

Its pretty obvious he wants to ignore that fact that this is the weakest heavyweight era of all time thats why he never brings it up.

Hindsight is a great thing.
Jack johnson is another oldie that gets destroyed by todays heavyweights as he only fought 20-30 rds back then.

Nathan cleverly is another fighter in the best lhw divison of all time and he schools a pre clinton woods roy jones.

Anyway, i cant talk long im fighting in germany next week as im over 200lbs and 6foot im a legitimate contender to the klitskos.

---

Have they moved on to fighting retards then??? I guess that's what happens when you dominate a division so thoroughly.

---

Lol. Muppet. Stick to the script.

Vlad dominates this divison. The same divison audley is in. If audley beats price then vlad will fight him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Plys 44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

This is a bit silly. Haye, Wlad and Vitali look like bodybuilders but that is not what puts power in their punches or provides evidence of stamina and physical fitness. There are many unfit bodybuilders who have little stamina and physical fitness and many other less ripped guys who have greater cardio fitness, resistance and staying power. If you are going to include fighters from the past you then also have to afford them the same nutritional and scientific training methods used by boxers today and put more hunger into modern boxers who have way more distractions and competition when it comes to building a legacy than fighters from a bygone age had. It does not work. While it is true that many of us have a tendency to romanticise the past it is also apparent that many modern fight fans exaggerate the achievements of todays greatest.

Wlad and Vitali are huge. You have to factor that in. If you do that you can then not ignore that fact when you calculate their greatness. If none of the older heavyweights would be big enough to compete today then maybe it is also true that you can not berate them for it or attribute too much to the dominance of two brothers who nearly always enter the ring with a huge size and weight advantage over their opponents.

That said 6 times out of ten Joe stops Wlad and outpoints Vitali. ;D

---

If you want to compare two boxers than you just have to say boxer X year 2012 vs. boxer Y year 1970. All other factors are irrelevant if you want to compare two boxers across time. The only reason to mention size, nutrition and blah blah blah blah is if you want past boxers to be the best.

"Wlad and Vitali are huge. You have to factor that in" - why? Last time I read the rules there was no weight limit in the HW division. What do you mean by saying "factor that in"? Should K2 start down 1 points every rd. or what?

---

Stuff and Nonsense. Whilst the ungainly Ukrainians are of course entitled to be awarded the accolades they have accrued today as rulers of a heavyweight division they are quite literally head and shoulders above, you can not ignore the fact that their size has afforded them an advantage heavyweight champions of the past did not possess. They do not fight as often and the quality of their opposition is nowhere near that of their predecessors. Posters in this thread have had the audacity to compare Mormeck and Frazier?!!! come on man in any era, heart, desire and the ability to not be intimidated before even entering the ring is massively important. Most Klitschko opponents are beaten before stepping through the ropes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imp

Lol. Muppet. Stick to the script.

Vlad dominates this divison. The same divison audley is in. If audley beats price then vlad will fight him.

---

Wlad can't help it if Audley wants to get his ass kicked repeatedly. It's not like Lennox Lewis' or Mike Tyson's divisions were devoid of bums. Mike Tyson fought Bruce Seldon....FOR A TITLE!!! That's how sorry the division was back then

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Plys 44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

This is a bit silly. Haye, Wlad and Vitali look like bodybuilders but that is not what puts power in their punches or provides evidence of stamina and physical fitness. There are many unfit bodybuilders who have little stamina and physical fitness and many other less ripped guys who have greater cardio fitness, resistance and staying power. If you are going to include fighters from the past you then also have to afford them the same nutritional and scientific training methods used by boxers today and put more hunger into modern boxers who have way more distractions and competition when it comes to building a legacy than fighters from a bygone age had. It does not work. While it is true that many of us have a tendency to romanticise the past it is also apparent that many modern fight fans exaggerate the achievements of todays greatest.

Wlad and Vitali are huge. You have to factor that in. If you do that you can then not ignore that fact when you calculate their greatness. If none of the older heavyweights would be big enough to compete today then maybe it is also true that you can not berate them for it or attribute too much to the dominance of two brothers who nearly always enter the ring with a huge size and weight advantage over their opponents.

That said 6 times out of ten Joe stops Wlad and outpoints Vitali. ;D

---

If you want to compare two boxers than you just have to say boxer X year 2012 vs. boxer Y year 1970. All other factors are irrelevant if you want to compare two boxers across time. The only reason to mention size, nutrition and blah blah blah blah is if you want past boxers to be the best.

"Wlad and Vitali are huge. You have to factor that in" - why? Last time I read the rules there was no weight limit in the HW division. What do you mean by saying "factor that in"? Should K2 start down 1 points every rd. or what?

---

Stuff and Nonsense. Whilst the ungainly Ukrainians are of course entitled to be awarded the accolades they have accrued today as rulers of a heavyweight division they are quite literally head and shoulders above, you can not ignore the fact that their size has afforded them an advantage heavyweight champions of the past did not possess. They do not fight as often and the quality of their opposition is nowhere near that of their predecessors. Posters in this thread have had the audacity to compare Mormeck and Frazier?!!! come on man in any era, heart, desire and the ability to not be intimidated before even entering the ring is massively important. Most Klitschko opponents are beaten before stepping through the ropes.

---

You could turn all the parameters as much as you like. You will always twist them so the B/W fighters are better than every present fighter. Your choice but very subjective. The only question is: would Wlad anno 2012 beat JF/Ali anno 1971.

Joe Frazier had less than 40 fights.....over a span of 16 years - so he had far less fights than Wlad and Vitali.......

JF met only 3 undefeated fighters with a combined record of 91-0 - Wlad has so far met (with Wach) 8 with 175-0.

Please do not mention Wlad and that smoking boxer in the same line :-D

Wlad has 14 more KOs than Frazier had fights - Frazier had only 27 KOs in 37 fights over more than 15 years :-( - very sad record for a great but pure facts :-(

It's always size used as the reason that the brothers would be competitive.

I don't know why Philosopher can't seem to get over the fact that sports and exercise science has evolved over the last 40 years... :vd:

Of course athletes are bigger and better conditioned nowdays compared to guts several decades ago.

When judging these guys in a purely physical sense you can only do so relevant to their contemporeries.

Imagine a 70s george foreman's genetics and natural talent coupled with the training regimes and the nutrition and pharmacuticals available to the klitschkos? He'd massacre Wlad and likely vitali too...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

I don't know why Philosopher can't seem to get over the fact that sports and exercise science has evolved over the last 40 years... :vd:

Of course athletes are bigger and better conditioned nowdays compared to guts several decades ago.

When judging these guys in a purely physical sense you can only do so relevant to their contemporeries.

Imagine a 70s george foreman's genetics and natural talent coupled with the training regimes and the nutrition and pharmacuticals available to the klitschkos? He'd massacre Wlad and likely vitali too...

---

And you're leaving out Healthcare which is also important for growing big and strong and healthy.

As for your other point "imagine"....well that's the deal isn't it you have to imagine something like that happening and if EVRYONE grew up to be a giant sure the Klitschko's wouldn't win much but given the division they have they'd be hard pressed to do any better than they are doing. They win, they don't lose rounds, and they win by stoppage.

Yeah, they fight who's out there... Can't fault them on that.

What I do fault is anybody who thinks the division today is better just because fighters are bigger.

Other sports and opportunities have sucked a lot of the talent away from modern heavyweight boxing, the 70s had more talent in my opinion... Talent doesn't evolve, physical knowledge and technology does and in my opinion if you applied it to 70s heavies then you'd have a division as physically fit as today, but vibrant with talent and hunger.

It's a shame for the klits, they'd get more creditfor being a nose a head of thr competition than they do for being a mile a head of it... Philosopher dumbing everything down to 'they're big' is a gross over simplication.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Yeah, they fight who's out there... Can't fault them on that.

What I do fault is anybody who thinks the division today is better just because fighters are bigger.

Other sports and opportunities have sucked a lot of the talent away from modern heavyweight boxing, the 70s had more talent in my opinion... Talent doesn't evolve, physical knowledge and technology does and in my opinion if you applied it to 70s heavies then you'd have a division as physically fit as today, but vibrant with talent and hunger.

It's a shame for the klits, they'd get more creditfor being a nose a head of thr competition than they do for being a mile a head of it... Philosopher dumbing everything down to 'they're big' is a gross over simplication.

---

Well what I have a problem with is no matter how good these guys are there seems to be a ceiling as to how great people can perceive them of being. Only Rocky Marciano retired the undefeated undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, only Joe Louis made 25 consecutive successful title defenses and even if the Klitschko's had done that they'd never be considered greater than those fighters. Even if Wlad had rivalries where he had to fight tooth and nail to win he wouldn't be considered as great as Ali. If Wlad talked trash and was very intimidating he'd never be considered as great as Tyson. I just don't agree with that, the guys are the best this era has to offer and they are as you said MILES ahead of their competition. They are great no doubt, but Wlad is still writing his legacy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Yeah, they fight who's out there... Can't fault them on that.

What I do fault is anybody who thinks the division today is better just because fighters are bigger.

Other sports and opportunities have sucked a lot of the talent away from modern heavyweight boxing, the 70s had more talent in my opinion... Talent doesn't evolve, physical knowledge and technology does and in my opinion if you applied it to 70s heavies then you'd have a division as physically fit as today, but vibrant with talent and hunger.

It's a shame for the klits, they'd get more creditfor being a nose a head of thr competition than they do for being a mile a head of it... Philosopher dumbing everything down to 'they're big' is a gross over simplication.

---

Well what I have a problem with is no matter how good these guys are there seems to be a ceiling as to how great people can perceive them of being. Only Rocky Marciano retired the undefeated undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, only Joe Louis made 25 consecutive successful title defenses and even if the Klitschko's had done that they'd never be considered greater than those fighters. Even if Wlad had rivalries where he had to fight tooth and nail to win he wouldn't be considered as great as Ali. If Wlad talked trash and was very intimidating he'd never be considered as great as Tyson. I just don't agree with that, the guys are the best this era has to offer and they are as you said MILES ahead of their competition. They are great no doubt, but Wlad is still writing his legacy.

---

B/W-syndrome - everything in the past was better than today.... - like talking with ones grandparents: "when I was young the winter was a lot harder than today - and the summer was much more sunny than today" - gnæk gnæk gnæk gnæk :-D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Yeah, they fight who's out there... Can't fault them on that.

What I do fault is anybody who thinks the division today is better just because fighters are bigger.

Other sports and opportunities have sucked a lot of the talent away from modern heavyweight boxing, the 70s had more talent in my opinion... Talent doesn't evolve, physical knowledge and technology does and in my opinion if you applied it to 70s heavies then you'd have a division as physically fit as today, but vibrant with talent and hunger.

It's a shame for the klits, they'd get more creditfor being a nose a head of thr competition than they do for being a mile a head of it... Philosopher dumbing everything down to 'they're big' is a gross over simplication.

---

Well what I have a problem with is no matter how good these guys are there seems to be a ceiling as to how great people can perceive them of being. Only Rocky Marciano retired the undefeated undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, only Joe Louis made 25 consecutive successful title defenses and even if the Klitschko's had done that they'd never be considered greater than those fighters. Even if Wlad had rivalries where he had to fight tooth and nail to win he wouldn't be considered as great as Ali. If Wlad talked trash and was very intimidating he'd never be considered as great as Tyson. I just don't agree with that, the guys are the best this era has to offer and they are as you said MILES ahead of their competition. They are great no doubt, but Wlad is still writing his legacy.

---

That would've helped him more than you're assuming it would have.
A LOT more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Plys 44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Yeah, they fight who's out there... Can't fault them on that.

What I do fault is anybody who thinks the division today is better just because fighters are bigger.

Other sports and opportunities have sucked a lot of the talent away from modern heavyweight boxing, the 70s had more talent in my opinion... Talent doesn't evolve, physical knowledge and technology does and in my opinion if you applied it to 70s heavies then you'd have a division as physically fit as today, but vibrant with talent and hunger.

It's a shame for the klits, they'd get more creditfor being a nose a head of thr competition than they do for being a mile a head of it... Philosopher dumbing everything down to 'they're big' is a gross over simplication.

---

Well what I have a problem with is no matter how good these guys are there seems to be a ceiling as to how great people can perceive them of being. Only Rocky Marciano retired the undefeated undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, only Joe Louis made 25 consecutive successful title defenses and even if the Klitschko's had done that they'd never be considered greater than those fighters. Even if Wlad had rivalries where he had to fight tooth and nail to win he wouldn't be considered as great as Ali. If Wlad talked trash and was very intimidating he'd never be considered as great as Tyson. I just don't agree with that, the guys are the best this era has to offer and they are as you said MILES ahead of their competition. They are great no doubt, but Wlad is still writing his legacy.

---

B/W-syndrome - everything in the past was better than today.... - like talking with ones grandparents: "when I was young the winter was a lot harder than today - and the summer was much more sunny than today" - gnæk gnæk gnæk gnæk :-D

---

They don't call it the Golden era of the division for nothing. I think younger generations do the exact opposite when it comes to fighters of eras gone by. They gravitate to what they know and live, its completely natural. Regarding the heavyweight division in a Foreman, Frazier, Ali etc etc era though, thank God they-we recognize the quality and competitiveness of that time and not just blow it off as some blurry photos and dusty fossils when compared to todays guys, well, most do not. It was just deeper and far more fan friendly.

Just want to point out the Axel Schulz vs George Foreman fight was no robbery, it was a very close fight that could of gone either way. George Foreman won a majority of the early rounds with Axel Schulz coming on late. I could see it 7-5 for either guy or a draw, people often claim close fights as robbery.

A clear robbery is Whitaker/Ramirez 1 Lewis vs Holyfield 1 where you can only make a claim that Ramirez, Holyfield, only won 4 rounds at the very most.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Plys 44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Yeah, they fight who's out there... Can't fault them on that.

What I do fault is anybody who thinks the division today is better just because fighters are bigger.

Other sports and opportunities have sucked a lot of the talent away from modern heavyweight boxing, the 70s had more talent in my opinion... Talent doesn't evolve, physical knowledge and technology does and in my opinion if you applied it to 70s heavies then you'd have a division as physically fit as today, but vibrant with talent and hunger.

It's a shame for the klits, they'd get more creditfor being a nose a head of thr competition than they do for being a mile a head of it... Philosopher dumbing everything down to 'they're big' is a gross over simplication.

---

Well what I have a problem with is no matter how good these guys are there seems to be a ceiling as to how great people can perceive them of being. Only Rocky Marciano retired the undefeated undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, only Joe Louis made 25 consecutive successful title defenses and even if the Klitschko's had done that they'd never be considered greater than those fighters. Even if Wlad had rivalries where he had to fight tooth and nail to win he wouldn't be considered as great as Ali. If Wlad talked trash and was very intimidating he'd never be considered as great as Tyson. I just don't agree with that, the guys are the best this era has to offer and they are as you said MILES ahead of their competition. They are great no doubt, but Wlad is still writing his legacy.

---

B/W-syndrome - everything in the past was better than today.... - like talking with ones grandparents: "when I was young the winter was a lot harder than today - and the summer was much more sunny than today" - gnæk gnæk gnæk gnæk :-D

---

They don't call it the Golden era of the division for nothing. I think younger generations do the exact opposite when it comes to fighters of eras gone by. They gravitate to what they know and live, its completely natural. Regarding the heavyweight division in a Foreman, Frazier, Ali etc etc era though, thank God they-we recognize the quality and competitiveness of that time and not just blow it off as some blurry photos and dusty fossils when compared to todays guys, well, most do not. It was just deeper and far more fan friendly.

---

It surely was a very exiting era and no one denies that fact - but that is not the same as postulating that The Smoker would stand a chance against Wlad. Carl Lewis is greater than any of today's sprinters or runners since his prime (at least until Bolt maybe wins medals in OL 2016) - but since CL's unbreakable 1991 100m record it has already been surpassed more than 80 times. Many of the runners with far lesser talent than CL but they are still better runners than CL ever was even CL is the greatest.

JF was great in his time - but I doubt he would be in top20 today even he is a greater boxer than every single one of them except Wlad and maybe Vitali.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Plys 44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Plys 44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Yeah, they fight who's out there... Can't fault them on that.

What I do fault is anybody who thinks the division today is better just because fighters are bigger.

Other sports and opportunities have sucked a lot of the talent away from modern heavyweight boxing, the 70s had more talent in my opinion... Talent doesn't evolve, physical knowledge and technology does and in my opinion if you applied it to 70s heavies then you'd have a division as physically fit as today, but vibrant with talent and hunger.

It's a shame for the klits, they'd get more creditfor being a nose a head of thr competition than they do for being a mile a head of it... Philosopher dumbing everything down to 'they're big' is a gross over simplication.

---

Well what I have a problem with is no matter how good these guys are there seems to be a ceiling as to how great people can perceive them of being. Only Rocky Marciano retired the undefeated undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, only Joe Louis made 25 consecutive successful title defenses and even if the Klitschko's had done that they'd never be considered greater than those fighters. Even if Wlad had rivalries where he had to fight tooth and nail to win he wouldn't be considered as great as Ali. If Wlad talked trash and was very intimidating he'd never be considered as great as Tyson. I just don't agree with that, the guys are the best this era has to offer and they are as you said MILES ahead of their competition. They are great no doubt, but Wlad is still writing his legacy.

---

B/W-syndrome - everything in the past was better than today.... - like talking with ones grandparents: "when I was young the winter was a lot harder than today - and the summer was much more sunny than today" - gnæk gnæk gnæk gnæk :-D

---

They don't call it the Golden era of the division for nothing. I think younger generations do the exact opposite when it comes to fighters of eras gone by. They gravitate to what they know and live, its completely natural. Regarding the heavyweight division in a Foreman, Frazier, Ali etc etc era though, thank God they-we recognize the quality and competitiveness of that time and not just blow it off as some blurry photos and dusty fossils when compared to todays guys, well, most do not. It was just deeper and far more fan friendly.

---

It surely was a very exiting era and no one denies that fact - but that is not the same as postulating that The Smoker would stand a chance against Wlad. Carl Lewis is greater than any of today's sprinters or runners since his prime (at least until Bolt maybe wins medals in OL 2016) - but since CL's unbreakable 1991 100m record it has already been surpassed more than 80 times. Many of the runners with far lesser talent than CL but they are still better runners than CL ever was even CL is the greatest.

JF was great in his time - but I doubt he would be in top20 today even he is a greater boxer than every single one of them except Wlad and maybe Vitali.

---

Yeah whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Plys 44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Plys 44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Yeah, they fight who's out there... Can't fault them on that.

What I do fault is anybody who thinks the division today is better just because fighters are bigger.

Other sports and opportunities have sucked a lot of the talent away from modern heavyweight boxing, the 70s had more talent in my opinion... Talent doesn't evolve, physical knowledge and technology does and in my opinion if you applied it to 70s heavies then you'd have a division as physically fit as today, but vibrant with talent and hunger.

It's a shame for the klits, they'd get more creditfor being a nose a head of thr competition than they do for being a mile a head of it... Philosopher dumbing everything down to 'they're big' is a gross over simplication.

---

Well what I have a problem with is no matter how good these guys are there seems to be a ceiling as to how great people can perceive them of being. Only Rocky Marciano retired the undefeated undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, only Joe Louis made 25 consecutive successful title defenses and even if the Klitschko's had done that they'd never be considered greater than those fighters. Even if Wlad had rivalries where he had to fight tooth and nail to win he wouldn't be considered as great as Ali. If Wlad talked trash and was very intimidating he'd never be considered as great as Tyson. I just don't agree with that, the guys are the best this era has to offer and they are as you said MILES ahead of their competition. They are great no doubt, but Wlad is still writing his legacy.

---

B/W-syndrome - everything in the past was better than today.... - like talking with ones grandparents: "when I was young the winter was a lot harder than today - and the summer was much more sunny than today" - gnæk gnæk gnæk gnæk :-D

---

They don't call it the Golden era of the division for nothing. I think younger generations do the exact opposite when it comes to fighters of eras gone by. They gravitate to what they know and live, its completely natural. Regarding the heavyweight division in a Foreman, Frazier, Ali etc etc era though, thank God they-we recognize the quality and competitiveness of that time and not just blow it off as some blurry photos and dusty fossils when compared to todays guys, well, most do not. It was just deeper and far more fan friendly.

---

It surely was a very exiting era and no one denies that fact - but that is not the same as postulating that The Smoker would stand a chance against Wlad. Carl Lewis is greater than any of today's sprinters or runners since his prime (at least until Bolt maybe wins medals in OL 2016) - but since CL's unbreakable 1991 100m record it has already been surpassed more than 80 times. Many of the runners with far lesser talent than CL but they are still better runners than CL ever was even CL is the greatest.

JF was great in his time - but I doubt he would be in top20 today even he is a greater boxer than every single one of them except Wlad and maybe Vitali.

---

Lost me there with Carl, Bolt and the running thing but in this division where a totally shot carnival float named Rahman is considered a mandatory #1 contender, I dont doubt they would omit a guy of Fraziers caliber.

Don't know of anyone saying Frazier owns Wlad but the guy fractured faces of some of the hardest heads at hvy and def wouldn't do what his last number of opponets did...except role...in trying to land a bomb. Wlad isn't a cyborg for shits sake.

Foremans second career:

-Scraped a Majority decision against alex stewart who after a dodgy start began to outbox foreman as the fight progressed, stewart was comprehensivly beaten by klitschko victim phil jackson, ibragimov victim lance whitaker and peter victim maskaev.

-Was stripped of the WBA belt after refusing to fight tony tucker and opted to fight probably the most vulnerable champion of the 90's, southpaw michael moorer, was schooled for 9 rounds until moorer's chin caught up with him again! Imagine what southpw byrd would have done to foreman!

-Fought gerry cooney who was in retirement for 3 years and in the depths of drugs, depression and achohol dependancy!

-Fought 5'5" former CW champ Dwight Muhammad Qawi who weighed 222lbs for the fight, a few months prior he scaled at 190 lbs for holyfield and went back down to CW immediately after losing to foreman!

-Dropped a wide decision to perrenial steroid abuser and notorious china chin tommy 'the actor' morrison! Morrison was kayoed in 1 the same year by herbie hide victim michael bentt!

-Average axel schultz outboxed and outworked foreman, leaving him a busted up mess, George wasw awarded a disgraceful decision, foreman was stripped again (this time by the IBF) for refusing to rematch schultz!

-Fought lou Savarese to a SD.

-Backed out of a fight with rahmam and opted to fight the in experienced shannon briggs who had already been stopped by Darroll Wilson, briggs fought to cautiously and george may have just deserved this one! However, briggs was struggling with men like botha and sedrick fields at this point too so acquitting himself well against briggs was no indication of anything other than foreman again was struggling with B level fighters...

Foremans second career was a bit of a side show and a well managed charade, i repect foreman of course, he made a fight of it with holy in the latter part of there fight and won a title at that amazing age but in truth he was an easy fighter to outbox who picked his opponents very well, who can blame him though!

Scape away all the hyperbole of his first career too and u will see he was far from the unbeatable monster some portay him as:
Foreman made a name off of fighting frazier, frazier as stated would be the klitschkos smallest ever opponent, he would be a small CW by todays standards in fact! That foreman destroyed frazier is not proof of anything.

-Fought like some crude amateur with the ring intelligence of a drunk vs ali...

-Outboxed by young and put down in round twelve ( Young wasn't even a puncher and scored 3 KO's throughout his entire career!)

-Brutal fight with ron lyle in hich he was floored twice.

See? Sorry but id favour many fighters over the last decade to beat any version of foreman. And as i said even foreman himself admits the klitschkos are better than him.

Schultz was a terrible decision, why do u think foreman declined an immediate rematch?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSKZeP-DF6c

Look how dejected and beat up foreman is afterwards, he knew he lost. It was bad that Schultz was given a title shot, but it was worse that he was denied the win after outscoring and outpunching George. Some ppl think Savarese got jobbed, too.

P.s No version of foreman beats vitali (only way vitali loses is on cuts or a feak injury!) Vitali hardly ever loses a round or get's dropped, foreman was dropped by featherfist jimmy young and journeyman ron lyle twice and was also outboxed on numerous occasions by lesser men than klitschko! Does formen have a shot at knocking out vitali? 240/250lb men like Lennox, sanders and peter couldn't do so, So no!

He has a shot at younger wlad who had stamina and defense issues, but the older version beats him. Ppl like to bring up wlads 3 losses to inferior fighters, wlad has beaten far better men than the 3 men he lost to! Thing is both brewster and purrity were being totally outboxed by wlad before the stoppage, and in truth 2nd forman was struggling with lesser fighters than brewster and purrity, Foreman wins if and only if wlad gasses or makes a rookie mistake but other than that he loses! He's not outboxing WK. And the sanders that wlad, VK and rahman fought has a big chance over foreman.

I have not read all thepost on this thread apart from the Original post.

Frazier vs Wlad.....205lbs or Frazier vs 240lbs of Wlad??

size would come into it..YES you would be crazy not to mention it although smokin Joe did KO bigger guys eg Buster Mathis who was 243lbs

The only guy that was able to keep Frazier away from him was Foreman...Ali couldnt do it and im very sure Wlad wouldnt be able to do it...why??

Foreman was a walk forward bomber who stood his ground, that is simply not Wlads style. Wlad tends to take his time and tries to wear down his oppoenent for a later stoppage.(box off back foot)

Frazier would make Wlad work like never before, if that left hook land clean enough then it all over. Wlad is too wooden and safety first to beat a prime frazier. Wlad would need to land a massive massive punch to win as Frazier would outwork and outfight him. It might be close for 7-8 rounds DUE to Wlads size but he hast fought anything like the machine Frazier was in his prime.

Smokin Joe would win probably by a Ko anywhere between 10-15 rounds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fightscorecollector

I have not read all thepost on this thread apart from the Original post.

Frazier vs Wlad.....205lbs or Frazier vs 240lbs of Wlad??

size would come into it..YES you would be crazy not to mention it although smokin Joe did KO bigger guys eg Buster Mathis who was 243lbs

The only guy that was able to keep Frazier away from him was Foreman...Ali couldnt do it and im very sure Wlad wouldnt be able to do it...why??

Foreman was a walk forward bomber who stood his ground, that is simply not Wlads style. Wlad tends to take his time and tries to wear down his oppoenent for a later stoppage.(box off back foot)

Frazier would make Wlad work like never before, if that left hook land clean enough then it all over. Wlad is too wooden and safety first to beat a prime frazier. Wlad would need to land a massive massive punch to win as Frazier would outwork and outfight him. It might be close for 7-8 rounds DUE to Wlads size but he hast fought anything like the machine Frazier was in his prime.

Smokin Joe would win probably by a Ko anywhere between 10-15 rounds

---

You remember how vs Ali many comments were made about Joe taking 3 punches to land one, granted that night he made it work but vs Wladimir you're simply not going to want to get hit at a 3 to 1 ratio. Wladimir controls pace and distance with his jab which is powerful and accurate. Frazier's defense was mostly about bobbing up and down and subtley slipping punches at a distance in order to leap in with the big left hook....you don't want to leap in when there's a right cross barrelling down on you from a fighter like Wlad. I respect Joe Frazier, he was a great fighter but styles make fights and Frazier is a 1 armed fighter unless he can get in on the inside with the short right hand and vs Wladimir he simply wouldn't be able to do that.

Philosopher you are a imbecile with your so called facts. Look at reality, just because Foreman was more experienced does not necessary mean he was better than the original prime version. Young George would have battered old Foreman, in fact old George would never have fought him in the first place. Old George publicly stated he would never fight Lennox because he would be beat, old George was very selective with his opponents. Do not compare old George to the prime George, old George had a better jab and personality but that would not have kept him from losing to prime Foreman. Stop quoting his comeback fights as a weakness, if anything they add to his legacy because he should not have won any of them coming back from boxing with that much gap, it is a testimont to his punch power and commitment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fightscorecollector

I have not read all thepost on this thread apart from the Original post.

Frazier vs Wlad.....205lbs or Frazier vs 240lbs of Wlad??

size would come into it..YES you would be crazy not to mention it although smokin Joe did KO bigger guys eg Buster Mathis who was 243lbs

The only guy that was able to keep Frazier away from him was Foreman...Ali couldnt do it and im very sure Wlad wouldnt be able to do it...why??

Foreman was a walk forward bomber who stood his ground, that is simply not Wlads style. Wlad tends to take his time and tries to wear down his oppoenent for a later stoppage.(box off back foot)

Frazier would make Wlad work like never before, if that left hook land clean enough then it all over. Wlad is too wooden and safety first to beat a prime frazier. Wlad would need to land a massive massive punch to win as Frazier would outwork and outfight him. It might be close for 7-8 rounds DUE to Wlads size but he hast fought anything like the machine Frazier was in his prime.

Smokin Joe would win probably by a Ko anywhere between 10-15 rounds

---

You remember how vs Ali many comments were made about Joe taking 3 punches to land one, granted that night he made it work but vs Wladimir you're simply not going to want to get hit at a 3 to 1 ratio. Wladimir controls pace and distance with his jab which is powerful and accurate. Frazier's defense was mostly about bobbing up and down and subtley slipping punches at a distance in order to leap in with the big left hook....you don't want to leap in when there's a right cross barrelling down on you from a fighter like Wlad. I respect Joe Frazier, he was a great fighter but styles make fights and Frazier is a 1 armed fighter unless he can get in on the inside with the short right hand and vs Wladimir he simply wouldn't be able to do that.

---

i understand what you are saying although you have to think of Ali's speed of punch compared to Wlad's. Total night and day. I think Frazier wouldnt have been hit with as many as Ali hit with. Vs Wlad i just think he is too wooden to keep Joe off him effectivley for 15 rounds.