What would happen if Klitschko called out Ali's opponents?

Of the 61 fights that Clay/Ali fought 29 wouldn't be allowed nowadays as heavyweight because one or both opponents were below 200 lbs at the time of the bout. In other words they would run as cruiser fights (or below) and Klitschko wouldn't be allowed to stage them.

Of the remaining 32 fights Ali lost 4.

Of the remaining 28 fights Ali fought 10x against opponents LIGHTER than Eddie Chambers (Wladimir Klitschko's lightest opponent), thus today's fans would shout "they should move down to cruiserweight" and "it's proof of how the division sucks" or what a mismatch it is.

Of the remaining 18 fights 2 wouldn't be allowed for medical reasons: Joe Frazier was blind on his left eye and Cleveland Williams was gunshot. Another proof of the "dire state of the division"

Of the remaining 16 fights Ali couldn't KO his opponents in 10 fights (within 12 rounds) thus they would be "proof of how featherfisty Wlad is with a KO'ratio of 38%" and that "Marciano would KO this bum Wlad in 1 round"

Of the remaining 6 fights 1 was a bum ·Charley Powell (25-11) which would be another proof for the "worst era in heavyweight boxing"

Of the remaining 5 fights 2 were against guys coming off a loss (Ron Lyle, Alvin Lewis) and fans would accuse Wlad of "cherry-picking".

Of the remaining 3 fights 2 were against a cruiser-bum beater (Sonny Liston) and fans would speculate about how the mob or Wladimir's radical Muslim friends have illegally influenced the outcome, since both endings (shoulder injury, phantom punch) were highly suspicious. Fans would complain that Sonny Liston didn't come to fight since he chickened out as soon as he saw fit.

The remaining 1 fight was against an opponent who gassed in the heat and sultriness of the rain season in the rain forest (George Foreman) and fans would shout "Lame, nowadays heavies cannot go 15 rounds anymore like Joe Louis".

That's approximately how Ali's record would be seen nowadays.

There is an even simpler nutshell, that sums up even better the abysmal state of Ali's era:
A guy with Parkinson's (Muhammad Ali) fighting against a 6-0 cruiser bum (Spinks, 197 lbs) for the unified heavyweight title…. and losing (and then avenging).

THAT's all you need to know about The Golden Age of Heavyweight Boxing.
Probably the lowest point in all heavyweight history!

You can take anyones record and make out it is weak. To say the best decade of heavyweights was poor shows you an idiot.

In one thread you start saying Adamek would beat Holyfield, Foreman and Holmes and then you say the 70's fighters are too small.

Be consistent.

1: You don't read so good. I never said once and in fact insisted many times that I think Holyfield would beat Adamek and I also stated the fact that they are the same size! Same goes for Holmes and I only offered I thought Adamek might be able to outpoint the old version of Foreman Holy fought but the prime one would beat him. BUSTED!

2: You cannot do this to anybody's record because..

(a) Modern HW boxers are not ALLOWED to pad their records against Cruiserweights like Ali and previous champs were allowed to and..

(b) Modern HW boxers are heavily criticised by a more scrutinizing and in your face media should they stage fights against bums and losers like Ali and previous champs did.

The opponents of Lewis and Klitschko's are not only heavier but have such better win/loss records, better KO ratio's to leave no doubt about the lack of quality of the era in question.

Let's look at Ali's top 5 opponents...

1/ George Foreman - Best win, comparable to modern opponent! But George fought like an absolute idiot and is almost as responsible for losing such an easy fight as Ali can be given credit for winning it!

2/ Ron Lyle - decent opponent, good win, but Lyle was coming off a loss. Neither was he particularly skilled or anything special in terms of power or size today. (A little below average).

3/ Joe Frazier - A chinny, featherfisted punch bag half blind dwarf who would not be allowed to box today and were he to cheat the medical could only hope to compete at CW.

4/ Ken Norton - A glass jawed HW with a basically non-existent punch!

5/ Earnie Shaver's - Hardly any wins against good opponents, struggled against bums, a threat only to CW's and bums or both and who's overrated power was immense against CW sized opponents but which against modern sized athletes amounts to a KO ratio in the neighbourhood of Chris Byrd's!

6/ Sonny Liston - A notorious CRuiser cruncher, bum beater and loser luncher that never once beat a single opponent that did not fall into atleast one of those categories. His cherry picking only rivalled by Butterbean and LaMar Clarke and who was so slow and uncoordinated he was lucky he faced such poor quality opponents to be able to connect!

This myth is busted... BUSTED!

Who are you talking about as modern heavyweights? Outside K2 they are all shit and none have wins comparable to Alis

I agree with you to a small extent, in that I think that people look on that era with rose colored glasses and and really over rate that period in time. So called boxing experts love to rave on how this was the be all, end all era for heavyweights, and any subseqent HW champ would have been average at best if placed in Ali's era. Which of course is just silly.

You can only be as good as your era , I don't think clay would have been dominant if he was giving so much size away , but different era's in HW boxing with no limit to how heavy you can be means its a huge difference to say - Ray Robinson fighting now , as he would be fighting guys the same size weight etc.

I usually don't give reputation comments. But when I do, it has to be, either, EXTREMELY good. Or, it has to be dreadfully awful to the point where I wanted to puke in my mouth and then swallow.

I'd let the folks decide what I did to this post with regard to reputation.
:rolleyes:

Yes, I am convinced that Povetkin, Haye and Wach would have Ali converting back to Christianity :wc: When you face all comers, some repeatedly in an era, that's respectable. You can't pick the one you're born in. That's kook logic.

So much is mentioned about weight.

How about speed, reflexes, timing and heart?

The klits rule this era (after lennox) and outweigh pretty much everyone.

But now we have hindsight, to disrespect fighters like ali, frazier and foreman who fought 15 rounds on less pay is a bit silly.

Im NOT saying they were the best heavyweights of all time but i am saying that the same question could be asked if ali or liston called out the competition in the klits era.

I am more interested in the current era that is emerging now with wilder, fury etc and to see how well they do.

MaxPower is a great typist. He can string sentences together in a way that makes him seem intelligent. He's probably been told his whole life how smart he is. He's probably, unknowingly, surrounded himself with people who praise him for his intellect and debating skills... But his rabid-like pursuit of this singular and deeply flawed argument: "Old heavyweight fighters aren't as good as contemporary heavyweight fighters" exposes him as a simple minded troll who is starved for attention rather than someone who is interested in an objective discussion of heavyweight boxing and its history.

How many threads is he gonna start on the same subject?

Max Power is a Cunt on a wind up mission, same as Ross, he just wants a rise out of people ;)

I gotta ask this, is Max Power a troll? Because if you are sir, bravo. :appl:

Forget about comparing individuals of different eras in boxing. Concentrate on the quality of the matches. In no sport can you compare individuals from different eras, or teams for that matter. Can you compare today's Miami Heat against Bill Russell's Celtics of years past? No. Lebron James is twice as big and fast as any of those players from the Celtics. Likewise with American football. Linemen who now weigh a mere 275 pounds are considered too small to play in the NFL. It used to be they were huge at that weight.

Compare the quality of the matches. How many Ali-Fraziers have we had in recent years? How many Holmes-Nortons? How many Lewis-Vitalis? Tyson-Douglases? Zero. We have been deprived of exciting, quality, competitive HW matches for years..... seems like decades. This is what is actually killing interest in the division.

Of course fighters nowadays are bigger. Evolution. Bill Russell was 6'-9" when he played. He towered above everyone else and was a premier shot blocker. Nowadays, he'd be the size of a power forward, with little of the strength, speed, or agility needed at the position.

A few quick points... I don't hate Ali, in fact I'm sure he would be competitive in any era including the modern ones, wherever you take that to begin. But just to be sure this was not MY agenda targeted with this thread is was intended as a poke at the agenda of a large proportion of the boxing world who are polarised for whatever reason to the notion that these old guys would walk through the division as if it were nothing.

If you want to say the fights are boring today and you think the "golden age" had more depth in that sense then that is fine. I can certainly see your point. I hate the fact the fights are in Germany, I like the atmosphere in America, and I think Wladimir's fights and Vitali's recent fights are bore-fests, even a disgrace (Povetkin). But don't say they would stop any fighter not named Klitschko because that's simply not true, they would find themselves in deep water.

A guy commented on the weights, sure the gap is more pronounced in the HW division as there is no weight limit, guys like Ray Robinson would be on a more level playing field, I accept that. But it is what it is, in the HW division you are allowed to expressly outsize your opponent.

@ruthless rocco Your smart ass comment raised another important thing to consider, you wrote that the Klitschko's out size their opponents as opposed to Ali.

Well I hate to tell you that over whole career, Wladimir outweighs his opponents in only 50% of his fights! His average opponent being the same as himself and his median being 235lbs, bigger than virtually any of Ali's and 15lbs bigger than Foreman!

As for Ali, he in fact outweighed his opponents in a whopping 70% of his fights! Further more he out-talled the majority of them. For all the praise of his speed and footwork, were it not for his weight and range advantage over his opponents these other attributes may not have been as prevalent. Quarry did not enjoy similar success for instance. So it was in fact Ali who outsized most of his opponents, not Klitschko's!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

A few quick points... I don't hate Ali, in fact I'm sure he would be competitive in any era including the modern ones, wherever you take that to begin. But just to be sure this was not MY agenda targeted with this thread is was intended as a poke at the agenda of a large proportion of the boxing world who are polarised for whatever reason to the notion that these old guys would walk through the division as if it were nothing.

If you want to say the fights are boring today and you think the "golden age" had more depth in that sense then that is fine. I can certainly see your point. I hate the fact the fights are in Germany, I like the atmosphere in America, and I think Wladimir's fights and Vitali's recent fights are bore-fests, even a disgrace (Povetkin). But don't say they would stop any fighter not named Klitschko because that's simply not true, they would find themselves in deep water.

A guy commented on the weights, sure the gap is more pronounced in the HW division as there is no weight limit, guys like Ray Robinson would be on a more level playing field, I accept that. But it is what it is, in the HW division you are allowed to expressly outsize your opponent.

@ruthless rocco Your smart ass comment raised another important thing to consider, you wrote that the Klitschko's out size their opponents as opposed to Ali.

Well I hate to tell you that over whole career, Wladimir outweighs his opponents in only 50% of his fights! His average opponent being the same as himself and his median being 235lbs, bigger than virtually any of Ali's and 15lbs bigger than Foreman!

As for Ali, he in fact outweighed his opponents in a whopping 70% of his fights! Further more he out-talled the majority of them. For all the praise of his speed and footwork, were it not for his weight and range advantage over his opponents these other attributes may not have been as prevalent. Quarry did not enjoy similar success for instance. So it was in fact Ali who outsized most of his opponents, not Klitschko's!

---

@Max Power when and where did I say that stuff about the Klitchkos? I think you're confused. Again.

I am sorry rocco, it was @imp who made comment that Klitschko's outweigh all their opponents!!

Quote:

---

Yes, I am convinced that Povetkin, Haye and Wach would have Ali converting back to Christianity When you face all comers, some repeatedly in an era, that's respectable. You can't pick the one you're born in. That's kook logic.

---

Ali does in fact deserve the highest respect for this you are correct. He fought anywhere and he did not duck anyone (except of course a Foreman rematch but ducking a rematch is not as bad as ducking a fighter altogether). And of course it would be incredibly ridiculous of me to expect anything more from a past fighter than to beat the opponents of his own era (duh) but then again I am not the one making outrageous claims that those same past fighters would "take" Tyson, Lennox or K-bros. How many times have you seen a top 10 list with Muhammad at the top and Frazier and Foreman in top 5? Too many!

As for your quip... I think,

Povetkin UD Ali (10% punchers KO chance for Povetkin)
Haye KO6 Ali (no punchers chance for Ali)
Ali UD Wach (20% punchers chance for Wach)

the golden era had fighters who could take punches all night long and still come and knock your ass out.
the klitschkos are not in that league of grit and determinationa and devotion. And if Ali can be accused of outsizing his opponents than for sure so can the klitschkuntz.

Quote:

---

the golden era had fighters who could take punches all night long and still come and knock your ass out.
the klitschkos are not in that league of grit and determinationa and devotion. And if Ali can be accused of outsizing his opponents than for sure so can the klitschkuntz.

---

The golden era had fighters who, quote me, "could not punch through the surface tension of water" compared to modern opponents. Of COURSE they could take punches all night long. Were they to bring those chins along with their complete lack of defence into more powerful times they would mostly all be knocked out. It's just a fact mate! And it's a sign of the times. The 70's was a punch bag era. Unfortunately today the punches are so hard that a fighter cannot take that for rounds anymore, it is far easier to get KO'd today and that FORCES fighters to be better and more defensive today. They have no choice! If they make a mistake, they're gone! Back in those days, they literally stung like bees!

Most of those guys, only a few exceptions, would pose zero punch threat whatsoever to a modern HW.

George Foreman is the hardest puncher of the whole era encompassing the 60's and 70's to any reasonable person. His power was immense and I am certainly not knocking it. It's up there! But let's look at Foreman and bring him to reality. There is something peculiar about Foreman's KO's. He knocks his opponents down but they usually get back to their feet. His punches were not only arm punches but also push punches. They were not the grounded punches of Tommy Morrison or Mike Tyson nor were they the snapping punches of Wladimir Klitschko or LEnnox Lewis. When these guys strike the finishing shots, they REALLY knock their opponent the FO! They are concussed. So while I am not denying Foreman's total force in his shots, I think some modern HW's produce greater momentary impact force.

Who else hits hard like a modern heavy in the golden age? Liston? Shavers? Their power is rated against bums and cruisers period. They never knocked out a decent opponent who was not coming off losses with the exception maybe of Ken Norton and that was because he was a walking knockout and it's not surprising because skill wise Sonny and Earnie were terrible boxers. Even big George (6'4" 220lbs- not really that big these days) made his name by destroying mostly very um... "special" opposition indeed!

I've already established that Klitschko's only outweigh 50% of their opponents and their median opponent weight is about 10lbs less than themselves but still 30lbs heavier than the median opponent of Ali's! But since you pressed me it is true that the Klitschko's "out-tall" most all of their opponents and some declare their style and success depends on it.

Well to that I say "obviously" and throw it straight back to Ali. Do you think Ali's speed and footwork would have allowed him to cruise (and then later struggle) through his career were it not allied to his height and reach? I would argue that Jerry Quarry was just as skilled as Ali but because he was a little guy it didn't work for him as well. Obviously the only way Foreman could get away with wildly swinging at his opponents with no recourse to strategy or technique was because he was bigger and stronger than his opponents. Were he not, he'd be screwed!

this is all coming from the guy that doesnt credit the opinion of any boxing historian or boxer if it goes against what he believes ;D

I see little point to that long dribble of a post and what's there is completely moot, you can only be judged against the contemporaries of your era.

If 60s-70s heavies had access to the drugs, nutrition and training methods of today then they'd be as 'big' as guys today. What? You thought athletes being larger today is down to evolution? :rolleyes:

The fact that you're even trying to compare guys who trained using half a century old sports science and nutrition (we'll ignore PEDs *cough* Vitali) to what we have TODAY says it all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Of the 61 fights that Clay/Ali fought 29 wouldn't be allowed nowadays as heavyweight because one or both opponents were below 200 lbs at the time of the bout. In other words they would run as cruiser fights (or below) and Klitschko wouldn't be allowed to stage them.

Of the remaining 32 fights Ali lost 4.

Of the remaining 28 fights Ali fought 10x against opponents LIGHTER than Eddie Chambers (Wladimir Klitschko's lightest opponent), thus today's fans would shout "they should move down to cruiserweight" and "it's proof of how the division sucks" or what a mismatch it is.

Of the remaining 18 fights 2 wouldn't be allowed for medical reasons: Joe Frazier was blind on his left eye and Cleveland Williams was gunshot. Another proof of the "dire state of the division"

Of the remaining 16 fights Ali couldn't KO his opponents in 10 fights (within 12 rounds) thus they would be "proof of how featherfisty Wlad is with a KO'ratio of 38%" and that "Marciano would KO this bum Wlad in 1 round"

Of the remaining 6 fights 1 was a bum ·Charley Powell (25-11) which would be another proof for the "worst era in heavyweight boxing"

Of the remaining 5 fights 2 were against guys coming off a loss (Ron Lyle, Alvin Lewis) and fans would accuse Wlad of "cherry-picking".

Of the remaining 3 fights 2 were against a cruiser-bum beater (Sonny Liston) and fans would speculate about how the mob or Wladimir's radical Muslim friends have illegally influenced the outcome, since both endings (shoulder injury, phantom punch) were highly suspicious. Fans would complain that Sonny Liston didn't come to fight since he chickened out as soon as he saw fit.

The remaining 1 fight was against an opponent who gassed in the heat and sultriness of the rain season in the rain forest (George Foreman) and fans would shout "Lame, nowadays heavies cannot go 15 rounds anymore like Joe Louis".

That's approximately how Ali's record would be seen nowadays.

There is an even simpler nutshell, that sums up even better the abysmal state of Ali's era:
A guy with Parkinson's (Muhammad Ali) fighting against a 6-0 cruiser bum (Spinks, 197 lbs) for the unified heavyweight title…. and losing (and then avenging).

THAT's all you need to know about The Golden Age of Heavyweight Boxing.
Probably the lowest point in all heavyweight history!

---

Why I dont bother with boxing forums much any more.:(

I cant even be bothered to agrgue.

The only way to really attempt to fairly compare heavyweight fighters from different eras is to use a Pound 4 Pound like system of comparison.

Because the nutrition, training methods & steroids are all so different from one generation to another you have to level the playing field and imagine all the fighters being the same size and carrying their respective power and skill sets appropriately.
So you have to imagine Big George Foreman being as big as a Klitchko. You have imagine him having the benefit contemporary science, medicine, nutrition and drugs like the Klits have had.

You think Michael Grant could stand up to a 6'5, 250lb Joe Frazier? I don't think so.

Lets stop the stupidity being shown in these posts.

Foreman had genuine and natural power, just because Grant may be bigger does not mean he hit harder. Power is also about technique, timing, surprise and speed. The calibre of top fighters in the 70's were better hence why they may not have great statistical records. Fighters today try and protect their 0.

Hate to do this as Heavyweight Champ of the World Wladimir Klitschko must be respected: he has been The Man for a long time. However, this is relevant and pertinent to the discussion.

He has been knocked down at least 12 times.

In the history of Heavyweight Champions, only Floyd Patterson was knocked down more.

http://i338.photobucket.com/albums/n...ompilation.jpg

Well he may be chinny but least he got the technique to win...Anyway thats asides the point. To the original thread starter, I'll say this. a divisions strength is relative. A boxer is as much an evolution of training as well as his competitors. If Wlad was in an era where heavyweights weren't terribly hard punchers his fighting style would be far drastic to what it is today, Same could be said of Ali if his opponents had far more foot speed.

You cannot compare, you cannot with certainty even say who was better than who. "Why?" you might ask and the answer is simple, upsets happen all the time. Our perception of a boxers ability and the reality of whats going on in the ring will differ from time to time.

I would recommend this instead, enjoy the fact that you're alive and well in an era where you see a superb technical heavyweight champion. People have a tendency in this forum to insult other boxers to make in an attempt to make their personal favourites shine more for some unholy reason.

Ali's resume has no effect on Wlad's legacy or vice versa. Each is accomplished in their own way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

I see little point to that long dribble of a post and what's there is completely moot, you can only be judged against the contemporaries of your era.

If 60s-70s heavies had access to the drugs, nutrition and training methods of today then they'd be as 'big' as guys today. What? You thought athletes being larger today is down to evolution? :rolleyes:

The fact that you're even trying to compare guys who trained using half a century old sports science and nutrition (we'll ignore PEDs *cough* Vitali) to what we have TODAY says it all.

---

Good point

Just a current example (cant believe im saying this) but manny pac is probably the smallest welterweight but he probably hits the hardest..(i like to believe its ped free)

Same can be said for tyson.

Size doesnt always matter. (In boxing)

I think the fact that Carnera had a glass jaw and Valuev couldn't punch his way out of a paperbag says a lot too...

Quote:

---

If 60s-70s heavies had access to the drugs, nutrition and training methods of today then they'd be as 'big' as guys today. What? You thought athletes being larger today is down to evolution?

---

I've no doubt that this is the case and I'm not comparing a hypothetical army of golden age fighters. I'm comparing the "actual" ones because it's they who are usually used as the bench mark for "greatness".

Quote:

---

The only way to really attempt to fairly compare heavyweight fighters from different eras is to use a Pound 4 Pound like system of comparison.

Because the nutrition, training methods & steroids are all so different from one generation to another you have to level the playing field and imagine all the fighters being the same size and carrying their respective power and skill sets appropriately.
So you have to imagine Big George Foreman being as big as a Klitchko. You have imagine him having the benefit contemporary science, medicine, nutrition and drugs like the Klits have had.

You think Michael Grant could stand up to a 6'5, 250lb Joe Frazier? I don't think so.

---

Rocco in a way that IS kind of one of the points I'm getting at. It IS silly to compare them which is what OTHERS do in a favourable fashion since in reality the modern fighters are on average 1 or 2 weight ranges upward of what was previous. It would be like comparing a middleweight with a cruiser!.

What a stupid statement, if Joe Frazier were 6'5" and 250lbs he would neither fight like the real Frazier, nor have the same balance or anything. In fact I am POSITIVE Grant would still knock him out!

One look from Shavers and WladKlit would be KTFO:cwm33:

Yeah because Shaver's was an "expert" at KOing 6'7" 250lb technical boxer-punchers wasn't he! Idiot!

Shaver's KO'ed nobody of relevance... And I do mean NOBODY!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Yeah because Shaver's was an "expert" at KOing 6'7" 250lb technical boxer-punchers wasn't he! Idiot!

Shaver's KO'ed nobody of relevance... And I do mean NOBODY!

---

WladKlit is the biggest NOBODY, so I see your point



Oh yeah I forgot Young & Ellis would also fuck WladKlit up:lickish:

Quote:

---

Foreman had genuine and natural power, just because Grant may be bigger does not mean he hit harder. Power is also about technique, timing, surprise and speed. The calibre of top fighters in the 70's were better hence why they may not have great statistical records. Fighters today try and protect their 0.

---

@Master

The calibre of the 70's opponents was definitely not better! Let me ask you, how do you know the real quality of Ali's opponents, or Frazier's or Foreman's? How do you know the records and the quality of the opponents their opponents fought against? Are you telling me you've watched the couple thousand fights the opponents of these guys fought respectively?

I will tell you I have seen enough to make an honest assessment and I believe in one thing. That athletes and sportsmen get better and better as time goes by and it's a no brainer really. Everybody knows this! But people like you will try to bury the obvious in favour of your cultist attitudes toward the modern era. It happened to Ali in his time when everybody thought Marciano and Louis would have flogged Ali, it happened to Tyson, it happened to Lewis, and it's happening now.

Today's boxers are "visibly" not only bigger but far more skilled, faster and more athletic on average than the entire generation your are promoting. I'm not talking individuals or champs now, there will always be special circumstances, but in general the overall quality of this era shits all over the era of the 70's. When Klitschko beats an opponent, that opponent not only has a better record, he has it against opponents who had a better class of opponents as well.

Yesterdays contenders would be todays tomato cans!

I agree with you that power is more than just size, how stupid do you think I am! Thing is, Grant throws a cleaner punch than Foreman, you can SEE it! Grant knocked out REAL HW opponents, George knocked out tomato cans and cruisers mainly.

When George won the title from Frazier, check out his next fight. He defended his title against a guy named Jose Roman, watch it it only goes a round or 2. This is not an accurate measure of a mighty puncher, any HW today that is regarded as punch weak could not fail to knock this opponent out! And this was a TITLE DEFENCE! Wake up mate! This was another prime example of the "highly skilled golden age of boxing". Only a drunk could see this as a masterful boxing performance!

Ross Purutty TKO11 :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Oh yeah I forgot Young & Ellis would also fuck WladKlit up

---

So out of 90 odd fights you had to scratch your head to find 2 decent win opponents of Shaver's to also weigh in on old Wlad boy ey? How low can we go!

"Under-dog" Wlad must be a lucky guy, despite being the complete bum and nobody he is he had somehow managed for nearly 10 years in a row to overcome adversity again and AGAIN!

Quote:

---

Ross Purutty TKO11

---

Wladimir Klitschko has lost 3 fights out of 64 to date, looks like he will rack up several more and doesn't look like losing ever again. And all of his opponents were REAL 200+ HW opponents, not cruiserweights. Already this represents the greatest 200+ HW record OF ALL TIME!

Ross Purrity is lacking in certain skills, but he was a very experienced boxer and Wladimir was rather green at time of fight and had never been in the waters before that Puritty dragged him. He is a big tall guy with a lot of muscle and fights with high explosiveness. Therefore a fighter like this will gas much easier if they do not pace themselves, which is what happened. Since then, Wlad has never gassed again (under legit circumstances). He learned from his mistakes each time and made himself closer to invincible.

Puritty is the type of fighter that would have been in his element back in the 70's.
Muhammad Ali never fought someone as experienced+heavy as Ross Puritty, it's a fact!

If you watch the first punch landed by Corrie Sanders that dropped Klitschko in slow motion you will notice that Wlad's head got sandwiched between Sander's head and his punch. This would have wasted ANY boxer, Wlad still got up several times to be knocked down again and again until waved off. And in any case, Sander's is a 6'4" 225lb aggressive southpaw with lightening fast hands and fire in his fists. With more dedicated training he could have been a more prominent champ himself! This guy would have wasted the entire 70's division. Only Foreman would have been an obstacle. Since then Wlad has always been solid in defence.

Against Brewster he was extremely sick, confirmed by medical reports and the REAL ending for Brewster vs Klitschko came in their 2nd fight.

So of his 3 losses, only 2 were legit, 1 was a gas out and 1 he got caught early by a big shot and both were big guys with a big punch! And he has always finished the fight on his feet, never knocked unconscious. Even when he was about to fall into a hyperglycaemic coma! I'd say that's pretty bloody excellent.

Especially considering Muhammad Ali lost to such tomato cans like Frazier, Norton and Spinks! Where he was not just dropped by punchers chance or energy levels, he was actually outboxed from start to finish.

3 KO loses to NOBODIES ;D Guys Frazier, Norton & Spinks wouldn't have even let hold the spit bucket :D

LOL and they say I'M the wind up merchant! :)

we have a comedian in our presence

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by powerpuncher

we have a comedian in our presence

---

Dude calls Frazier a tomato can and I'm the comedian :confused: