Wladimir plans to box for 10 more years to break Joe louis' record

Wladimir Klitschko Eyes Another Ten Years as Champ - Boxing News

10 more years.. :eek:

Isn't Wladimir only a few fights away from breaking Joe Louis record now?

22 defences vs 25 isn't it?

So to me he only needs to fight 2 more fights after Leapai, therefore he should be announcing his retirement by middle of next year? Or take 1 more fight to break the record.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Isn't Wladimir only a few fights away from breaking Joe Louis record now?

22 defences vs 25 isn't it?

So to me he only needs to fight 2 more fights after Leapai, therefore he should be announcing his retirement by middle of next year? Or take 1 more fight to break the record.

---

I hope he does not fight another ten years. He's close to the record and probably wants to add a couple more after he reaches the record.
I'm hoping he retires as soon, after he breaks the record, as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Isn't Wladimir only a few fights away from breaking Joe Louis record now?

22 defences vs 25 isn't it?

So to me he only needs to fight 2 more fights after Leapai, therefore he should be announcing his retirement by middle of next year? Or take 1 more fight to break the record.

---

I could be wrong but I think Louis total defenses is 26. And consecutive defenses is 25. The consecutive is the record most pay attention to and Wlad is at like 15 so he'd have to fight a while to get there.(But I'm just going off the top of my head on this so I'll have to check)

You could be right about Louis, I thought it was 25 but I am not certain.

Wlad's consecutive streak is 17 so by that figure he needs 7 or 8 more wins respectively to make the record which at 2 fights a year means at most 4 years, more likely only 3.

So even by using the lowest fight rate, and the statistic with the largest void to overcome, we should still not have to put up with the old "jab and grab" for anywhere near another 10 years LOL.

It'd be a real test if Wladimir could really remain unbeaten until 48 years old anyway facing his mandatories. Then he'd be breaking Foreman's record too. I think to have any real shot at that he would have to chub up significantly to 260lbs and be prepared to take some more punishment as his speed and reflexes decline into advanced age, assuming his chin can be padded enough but I kinda doubt it at top level.

Wlad hasn't lost in 10 years.... 19 wins since his loss to Brewster. 22 overall title defenses, 19 consecutively.


Most consecutive successful defenses

Division Name Title Years Defenses

Heavyweight: Joe Louis World (1937-49) 25
Cruiserweight: Anaclet Wamba WBC Title (1991-94) 7
Light Heavyweight: Bob Foster World (1968-74) 14
Super Middleweight: Nigel Benn WBC Title (1992-95) 9
Middleweight: Carlos Monzon World (1970-77) 14
Junior Middleweight: Gianfranco Rosi IBF (1989-94) 11
Welterweight: Henry Armstrong World (1938-40) 19
Junior Welterweight: Julio Cesar Chavez WBC/IBF (1989-94) 12
Lightweight: Roberto Duran World (1972-79) 12
Junior Lightweight: Brian Mitchell IBF/WBA (1986-91) 12
Featherweight: Eusebio Pedroza WBA (1978-85) 19
Jr. Featherweight: Wilfredo Gomez WBC (1977-83) 17
Bantamweight: Orlando Canizales IBF (1988-94) 16
Junior Bantamweight: Khaosai Galaxy WBA (1984-91) 19
Flyweight: Miguel Canto WBC (1975-79) 14
Junior Flyweight: Myung Woo Yuh WBA (1985-91) 17
Strawweight: Ricardo Lopez WBC (1990-99) 21

I think the consecutive streak is not at all important anyway, it's the total defences that counts, the fact you dropped the ball but was able to pick it up again and continue should not detract from what you achieved previously.

So for anybody who is at all, objective Wladimir only has to win 3 more fights.

But since the OTNB community will stop at nothing to cherry pick every useless statistic they can to salvage their hero from the distant past and down-tread the bastard Commie (lol), I think Wladimir should score the rest of the victories before he retires anyway just to silence any argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

I think the consecutive streak is not at all important anyway, it's the total defences that counts, the fact you dropped the ball but was able to pick it up again and continue should not detract from what you achieved previously.

So for anybody who is at all, objective Wladimir only has to win 3 more fights.

But since the OTNB community will stop at nothing to cherry pick every useless statistic they can to salvage their hero from the distant past and down-tread the bastard Commie (lol), I think Wladimir should score the rest of the victories before he retires anyway just to silence any argument.

---

Being objective means not being factual, in your estimation?

Wlad could easily go for another ten years..his body is always in perfect condition for his fights theres loads of easy wins to just stack up in germany including £££.

This will spoil hayes plans as its pretty obvious that he is waiting for the brothers to retire, fury to loose and perhaps wilder to get exposed..so he can step in at around 36 years old and get an easier win to the title!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

I think the consecutive streak is not at all important anyway, it's the total defences that counts, the fact you dropped the ball but was able to pick it up again and continue should not detract from what you achieved previously.

So for anybody who is at all, objective Wladimir only has to win 3 more fights.

But since the OTNB community will stop at nothing to cherry pick every useless statistic they can to salvage their hero from the distant past and down-tread the bastard Commie (lol), I think Wladimir should score the rest of the victories before he retires anyway just to silence any argument.

---

Being objective means not being factual, in your estimation?

---

Neither statistic is non-factual, they are both true.

The total one is meaningful and the consecutive one is not, simple as that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

I think the consecutive streak is not at all important anyway, it's the total defences that counts, the fact you dropped the ball but was able to pick it up again and continue should not detract from what you achieved previously.

So for anybody who is at all, objective Wladimir only has to win 3 more fights.

But since the OTNB community will stop at nothing to cherry pick every useless statistic they can to salvage their hero from the distant past and down-tread the bastard Commie (lol), I think Wladimir should score the rest of the victories before he retires anyway just to silence any argument.

---

Being objective means not being factual, in your estimation?

---

Neither statistic is non-factual, they are both true.

The total one is meaningful and the consecutive one is not, simple as that.

---

Totally your opinion. And you know what they say about opinions?

At least all Louis had to fight was bums. Wlad has legitimate contenders he refuses to fight, and instead fights the likes or Mormeck, Leapai and Pianetta.

So, I guess Wlad feeds on bums until you guys are satisfied... which is a little sick, if you ask me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

I think the consecutive streak is not at all important anyway, it's the total defences that counts, the fact you dropped the ball but was able to pick it up again and continue should not detract from what you achieved previously.

So for anybody who is at all, objective Wladimir only has to win 3 more fights.

But since the OTNB community will stop at nothing to cherry pick every useless statistic they can to salvage their hero from the distant past and down-tread the bastard Commie (lol), I think Wladimir should score the rest of the victories before he retires anyway just to silence any argument.

---

Being objective means not being factual, in your estimation?

---

Neither statistic is non-factual, they are both true.

The total one is meaningful and the consecutive one is not, simple as that.

---

Totally your opinion. And you know what they say about opinions?

At least all Louis had to fight was bums. Wlad has legitimate contenders he refuses to fight, and instead fights the likes or Mormeck, Leapai and Pianetta.

So, I guess Wlad feeds on bums until you guys are satisfied... which is a little sick, if you ask me.

---

An opinion that makes common sense you mean :)

And those opponents were bad opponents that's true but then there have been good opponents too.

Besides, you cannot refer to them as "bums" exactly. Mormeck was a CW champion and Pianeta was big and undefeated.

What was the records like of Louis' opponents again???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

I think the consecutive streak is not at all important anyway, it's the total defences that counts, the fact you dropped the ball but was able to pick it up again and continue should not detract from what you achieved previously.

So for anybody who is at all, objective Wladimir only has to win 3 more fights.

But since the OTNB community will stop at nothing to cherry pick every useless statistic they can to salvage their hero from the distant past and down-tread the bastard Commie (lol), I think Wladimir should score the rest of the victories before he retires anyway just to silence any argument.

---

Being objective means not being factual, in your estimation?

---

Neither statistic is non-factual, they are both true.

The total one is meaningful and the consecutive one is not, simple as that.

---

Totally your opinion. And you know what they say about opinions?

At least all Louis had to fight was bums. Wlad has legitimate contenders he refuses to fight, and instead fights the likes or Mormeck, Leapai and Pianetta.

So, I guess Wlad feeds on bums until you guys are satisfied... which is a little sick, if you ask me.

---

An opinion that makes common sense you mean :)

And those opponents were bad opponents that's true but then there have been good opponents too.

Besides, you cannot refer to them as "bums" exactly. Mormeck was a CW champion and Pianeta was big and undefeated.

What was the records like of Louis' opponents again???

---

It is not, and I repeat, NOT a consecutive streak. Louis was the undisputed HW Champion of the world. All the tiles, or "thee" title. Wlad, when he cant beat a challenge, passed them off to his older, more tougher and durable brother.....

Pianetta was a softie. Mormeck was undersized and ballyhooed- someone that Haye destroyed at CW. Destroyed. Wlad beat Haye convincingly... so why move to fight Haye's left overs after the fact?

BS.

If Wlad can remain motivated then he can rule the division and make loads of money for many years to come. I thought he wanted to fight in the olympics in Brazil at least. He is a classy guy and I admire him for keeping the titles together other wise it would be mayhem.

BTW watched the povetkin fight again and Wlad is awful and if Tyson came at him he would fall and this is the best Wlad you will get.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

I think the consecutive streak is not at all important anyway, it's the total defences that counts, the fact you dropped the ball but was able to pick it up again and continue should not detract from what you achieved previously.

So for anybody who is at all, objective Wladimir only has to win 3 more fights.

But since the OTNB community will stop at nothing to cherry pick every useless statistic they can to salvage their hero from the distant past and down-tread the bastard Commie (lol), I think Wladimir should score the rest of the victories before he retires anyway just to silence any argument.

---

Being objective means not being factual, in your estimation?

---

Neither statistic is non-factual, they are both true.

The total one is meaningful and the consecutive one is not, simple as that.

---

Totally your opinion. And you know what they say about opinions?

At least all Louis had to fight was bums. Wlad has legitimate contenders he refuses to fight, and instead fights the likes or Mormeck, Leapai and Pianetta.

So, I guess Wlad feeds on bums until you guys are satisfied... which is a little sick, if you ask me.

---

An opinion that makes common sense you mean :)

And those opponents were bad opponents that's true but then there have been good opponents too.

Besides, you cannot refer to them as "bums" exactly. Mormeck was a CW champion and Pianeta was big and undefeated.

What was the records like of Louis' opponents again???

---

It is not, and I repeat, NOT a consecutive streak. Louis was the undisputed HW Champion of the world. All the tiles, or "thee" title. Wlad, when he cant beat a challenge, passed them off to his older, more tougher and durable brother.....

Pianetta was a softie. Mormeck was undersized and ballyhooed- someone that Haye destroyed at CW. Destroyed. Wlad beat Haye convincingly... so why move to fight Haye's left overs after the fact?

BS.

---

Yeah that's right, Mormeck was a stay busy fight.. A rest from the top contenders he'd been fighting. You can pay him out for it sure, but how many other champs fought such stay busy fights. I'll tell you one.. Joe bloody Louis! Most of his record was "stay busy" stuff.

The fact that a total mismatch like Mormeck for Wlad was such a high quality opponent is testament to the quality of Klitschko. And if Louis fought Mormeck it would have been among the biggest (apart from the known giants), the most athletic and most skilled by far and probably the greatest opponent he ever faced.

Oh, and I noticed you were not even satisfied with cherry picking the consecutive defense stat, you had to go one step further and now try to claim that Wladimir's early defences were not valid either because he did not hold all the belts.

Ha! It is in fact harder to capture and to hold onto all the belts than it is to do so for just one belt.

As far as I am concerned once you win a major version of the HW title (in this case the WBA, WBC, IBF or WBO), you are/were a HW champion!

Would you claim that Larry Holmes defences were not valid then also? ;)

Typical Old Time Nutbaggery, just as I described it! :rolleyes:

Physically Wlad the only area where Wlad might be declining is that he can't take as many fights in a year as he used to. The long term decline might be with the lose of Stewart as his trainer but otherwise why not rise to the challenge of fighting the new crop of contenders like Wilder and Fury? He's already proved himself to be very focused and motivated throughout his career.

I have to ask, what makes people think if Wlad retires then HW division would be suddenly entertaining? Instead of seeing a boxing clinic all you would see is two grown men fight sloppier than two drunken hobos.

At the very least, his very presence would demand a certain obligation to technique and conditioning from his opponent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

I have to ask, what makes people think if Wlad retires then HW division would be suddenly entertaining? Instead of seeing a boxing clinic all you would see is two grown men fight sloppier than two drunken hobos.

At the very least, his very presence would demand a certain obligation to technique and conditioning from his opponent.

---

What rubbish, Wladimir's opponents have historically been superb boxers on the whole. Without Wlad it would still be a very highly skilled division.

If it's so easy to be a professional HW boxer today and you care to diss them so harshlythen why aren't you one, why don't you compete and start whacking them around??

I'm merely going by the logic that people suggest that the heavyweight division is weakeat in history. By that logic then Wlad doesn't deserve the accolades and everyone is a bum. I disagree with this notion. I'm simply asking why do people think that if Wlad leaves it would be vbetter for the division by following their logic.

Moreover, although I appreciate the fact you respect all boxers coming off hostile towards a fellow poster doesn't so much in way of debate and dialogue. After all we are all fans here.

Well I will apologise then. Yes that wide spread chant has several origins but at it's core, with only minimal thinking effort, is in fact ridiculous.

There has never been a harder hitting era for one, and this is also the heftiest era on record. Going back more than 30 years, the HW division was a combination of what we today call HW and CW and the average opponent weight was something like 200lbs, smaller than any HW boxer today and smaller even than Chris Byrd. The top end boxers were below the average weight of todays boxers with a few giant exceptions. So there are really only a few eras worth of boxers to even compare with.

Then there's the skills. There is a tendency to greatly blow out of proportion past boxers skills as if they were masters of defence and offense and smooth as whipped cream. In reality many of them were complete punch bags and would probably not be professional boxers today were they to be trained and experienced as they were.

Then there's the athleticism, in the old days training was ridiculous, it had no relevance to the sport quite often. Today the champions are lean and mega fit and only some opponents were fat. In the past, the champs were either weak string beans or chubby! There has never been a more athletic time in HW boxing.

Look at Wladimir's opponents non-Klitschko fights and you can see how much better they are when compared with the opponents of say Mike Tyson or Larry Holmes for instance.

I am actually a proponent of the 90's era and Lennox Lewis myself but I really find the running down of the current era absolutely disgraceful and idiotic.

I think only about 5% of the people who say that actually believe it, and they are all probably a hundred years old and recapping what they thought they saw ringside in 1965 or something lol. The rest are just jealous that it is not a black American holding the titles anymore and instead a pair of white, former commie, Slavic boxers replanted the flag of HW boxing on the other side of the world making them next to irrelevant at HW.

And in fact that basically explains your original question posed in your original post.

The reason people think the division is going to pick up again once Wladimir goes is that there are now American contenders ready for the titles (Arreola, Wilder, Stiverne, Jennings, others) and I'll bet you that as soon as an American is back on top again, suddenly HW boxing will be good again. These ppl say that because they KNOW that the HW division is good, it's just that Klitschko is so good, so big and so dominant that he outshines all contenders.

That's why there are few opportunities for ATG these days, dominance prevents that. The more "ATG's" an era features REALLY means that none of the boxers in that era were really THAT great, otherwise they wouldn't have let other boxers shine brightly enough to be considered.

Yeah I don't see that happening. He's 38, he's not going to box until 48. His reflexes are going go within the next few years and so is his speed, legs and athleticism. And when they go and guys are able to get in and touch his chin, it's over Johnny.

Havent bothered reading much of the replies here becuase for some reason most of you are comparing Wlad defending 1 belt out of 4 for years, to Louis holding THE belt.

Hes only been one of the best, not THE best so its all bullshit.

Since all the other titles were created only Mike Tyson has had the longest unified reign.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

I'm merely going by the logic that people suggest that the heavyweight division is weakeat in history. By that logic then Wlad doesn't deserve the accolades and everyone is a bum. I disagree with this notion. I'm simply asking why do people think that if Wlad leaves it would be vbetter for the division by following their logic.

Moreover, although I appreciate the fact you respect all boxers coming off hostile towards a fellow poster doesn't so much in way of debate and dialogue. After all we are all fans here.

---

Part of it comes from the top 10's reluctance to fight each other. Instead they all just bide their time waiting for their shot at Wlad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

And in fact that basically explains your original question posed in your original post.

The reason people think the division is going to pick up again once Wladimir goes is that there are now American contenders ready for the titles (Arreola, Wilder, Stiverne, Jennings, others) and I'll bet you that as soon as an American is back on top again, suddenly HW boxing will be good again. These ppl say that because they KNOW that the HW division is good, it's just that Klitschko is so good, so big and so dominant that he outshines all contenders.

That's why there are few opportunities for ATG these days, dominance prevents that. The more "ATG's" an era features REALLY means that none of the boxers in that era were really THAT great, otherwise they wouldn't have let other boxers shine brightly enough to be considered.

---

Mate you are tryin too hard and tying yourself in knots in the process. You are so one note compared to the so called old timer nut huggers that you declaim that every post you make quickens the evaporation of what little credibility your argument held.


So now anybody who thinks differently to you is now really a closet racist and ATG were not really great just mediocre in an era of bums compared to today's supremely skilled and fit specimens of the HW division?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

And in fact that basically explains your original question posed in your original post.

The reason people think the division is going to pick up again once Wladimir goes is that there are now American contenders ready for the titles (Arreola, Wilder, Stiverne, Jennings, others) and I'll bet you that as soon as an American is back on top again, suddenly HW boxing will be good again. These ppl say that because they KNOW that the HW division is good, it's just that Klitschko is so good, so big and so dominant that he outshines all contenders.

That's why there are few opportunities for ATG these days, dominance prevents that. The more "ATG's" an era features REALLY means that none of the boxers in that era were really THAT great, otherwise they wouldn't have let other boxers shine brightly enough to be considered.

---

Mate you are tryin too hard and tying yourself in knots in the process. You are so one note compared to the so called old timer nut huggers that you declaim that every post you make quickens the evaporation of what little credibility your argument held.


So now anybody who thinks differently to you is now really a closet racist and ATG were not really great just mediocre in an era of bums compared to today's supremely skilled and fit specimens of the HW division?

---

No I don't mean to attack any other era at all, just defend this one.

1/ The logic goes here is that the era is weak (because it has been ordained that way for said reasons). Wladimir presides over a weak era, so therefore his supreme dominance is really nothing that special.

2/ When Wladimir dominates his opponents or beats them very easily, they must have been bums since Wlad isn't really that good.

3/ When Wladimir struggles with an opponent or loses Wladimir must be a bum because he lost to a bum.

See there's no way out of this situation. No matter what Wladimir does and more importantly no matter what Wladimir's OPPONENTS do/can do, they are simply labelled...

"No better than 2 drunk hobos fighting down the pub". original quote from earlier.

So don't point at me for making outrageous assumptions mate, they were made in the beginning.

Tell THAT to Sultan Ibragimov, I am sure he would agree that he was not worthy to fight in another era. I mean even Holyfield stated that in all his years of boxing, I've not had someone pull moves on me like that.

Wlad is yet to be THE heavyweight champ.

He may never be THE heavyweight champ.

He has yet to unify the belts and be the undisputed champion, yet alone make any defences of the unified championships.

What a load of shit!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Wlad is yet to be THE heavyweight champ.

He may never be THE heavyweight champ.

He has yet to unify the belts and be the undisputed champion, yet alone make any defences of the unified championships.

What a load of shit!

---

You understand you can't be THE champion anymore right? As soon as he picks up the WBC he will either have to drop all the other belts or drop the WBC belt. I don't see how beating some chump carrying the WBC belt somehow makes him more of a champion than beating top contender after top contender.

He is the HW champ, always has been for years.

Now what kind of fucking moron would argue otherwise!

:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron Swanson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ross

Wlad is yet to be THE heavyweight champ.

He may never be THE heavyweight champ.

He has yet to unify the belts and be the undisputed champion, yet alone make any defences of the unified championships.

What a load of shit!

---

You understand you can't be THE champion anymore right? As soon as he picks up the WBC he will either have to drop all the other belts or drop the WBC belt. I don't see how beating some chump carrying the WBC belt somehow makes him more of a champion than beating top contender after top contender.

---

Of course he can.

Im pretty sure even the most casual fan can tell you who the undisputed champs have been since the emergence of the other belts.

Tyson, Douglas, Holyfield, Bowe, Lewis. Thats it.

Its a marker of greatness. The next would be how long they held them together and defended. Tyson, easily being top with 6 defences, losing in the 7th.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

He is the HW champ, always has been for years.

Now what kind of fucking moron would argue otherwise!

:rolleyes:

---

No he hasnt. Hes had 1 belt for years and hasnt had to face all comers. Hes only been a belt holder, only having to face one third of the challengers out there to hold on to that belt. Not all comers as those whove held the three belts simultaneously have had to do. He left alot to his brother that he couldnt cope with.

Hes never been undisputed and has never defended the undisputed title.

I think most will agree they dont count the WBO.

Its much more difficult holding together the WBC, WBA and IBF as you HAVE to fight everyone. Why do you think Wlad has held that one title so long? Its still a good acheivment but nothing like becoming undisputed.

You are purposely being argumentative. There is no way you can dismiss the achievements of this guy as anything less than the most dominant career in history!

The WBO is now recognised as a major belt, when it was established it took some time to be regarded as such in the HW division.

Wlad has unified the WBO, IBF, WBA major belts as well as the IBO and recognised as "The Ring" HW champion for a very long time... That is the REAL HW champion.

Where the hell do you get this notion he only held 1 belt? He's been DEPRIVED of only 1 belt more like it. And everybody knows the only reason he could never get his hands on the WBC was because his brother had it.

Now who is better out of Vitali and Wlad is a matter of dispute, but I think it's fair to say that later in the game it has been Wladimir who definitely had the upper hand.

I seen Wlad win back one title after another right after his last defeat and then defend them successfully ever since.

And you want to compare Mike Tyson's (bless him) 6 fight defenses to this!

Get the hell out of here mate! Pure nutbaggery at it's finest @ross !!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

You are purposely being argumentative. There is no way you can dismiss the achievements of this guy as anything less than the most dominant career in history!

The WBO is now recognised as a major belt, when it was established it took some time to be regarded as such in the HW division.

Wlad has unified the WBO, IBF, WBA major belts as well as the IBO and recognised as "The Ring" HW champion for a very long time... That is the REAL HW champion.

Where the hell do you get this notion he only held 1 belt? He's been DEPRIVED of only 1 belt more like it. And everybody knows the only reason he could never get his hands on the WBC was because his brother had it.

Now who is better out of Vitali and Wlad is a matter of dispute, but I think it's fair to say that later in the game it has been Wladimir who definitely had the upper hand.

I seen Wlad win back one title after another right after his last defeat and then defend them successfully ever since.

And you want to compare Mike Tyson's (bless him) 6 fight defenses to this!

Get the hell out of here mate! Pure nutbaggery at it's finest @ross !!!

---

Your full of shit!

The Klitschkos had the money in the division, if they wanted to get those titles they could have.

Who was better out of Vitali and Wlad? Vitali was, so Wlad is only dominant since Vitalis retirement and he still needs to unify to be the only heavyweight champ.

Do you think its possible for him to unify or worried he might lose in the process of trying?

Hey Ross, just in case you hadn't heard, the pair of them together have had ALL the titles locked up for ever.

Vitali the WBC,
Wladimir all the others

They both DID have all the titles. The only thing EVER preventing unification has always been the fact the brothers wont fight each other.

I have seen a lot of weird angles used to beat on the Ukranians but this is a new one!! Instead of attacking the quality of them, attack the achievements themselves.

Nice one!! =P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

You are purposely being argumentative. There is no way you can dismiss the achievements of this guy as anything less than the most dominant career in history!

The WBO is now recognised as a major belt, when it was established it took some time to be regarded as such in the HW division.

Wlad has unified the WBO, IBF, WBA major belts as well as the IBO and recognised as "The Ring" HW champion for a very long time... That is the REAL HW champion.

Where the hell do you get this notion he only held 1 belt? He's been DEPRIVED of only 1 belt more like it. And everybody knows the only reason he could never get his hands on the WBC was because his brother had it.

Now who is better out of Vitali and Wlad is a matter of dispute, but I think it's fair to say that later in the game it has been Wladimir who definitely had the upper hand.

I seen Wlad win back one title after another right after his last defeat and then defend them successfully ever since.

And you want to compare Mike Tyson's (bless him) 6 fight defenses to this!

Get the hell out of here mate! Pure nutbaggery at it's finest @ross !!!

---

i can, i dont think his career can really be taken seriously due to the hurrendous amount he is allowed to cheat in his fights

he obviously has a weakness and he is allowed to cheat in the most effective way possible to protect it

he wouldnt be allowed to get away with it if he didnt generate the amount of money he does

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Hey Ross, just in case you hadn't heard, the pair of them together have had ALL the titles locked up for ever.

Vitali the WBC,
Wladimir all the others

They both DID have all the titles. The only thing EVER preventing unification has always been the fact the brothers wont fight each other.

I have seen a lot of weird angles used to beat on the Ukranians but this is a new one!! Instead of attacking the quality of them, attack the achievements themselves.

Nice one!! =P

---

Oh, so your not arguing on behalf of Wlad but "the brothers" standing in heavyweight history?

Wlads achievements on their own are good but he needs to beat the winner of the upcoming WBC fight to seal it.

It is possible to unify the belts, other fighters in other divisions have done it. By not unifying you are avoiding having to fight certain fighters so you can take on people like Mormeck and extend your career.

Good business move but not a great career.

Wlad doesn't automatically inherit that other 50% dominance his brother held over the division for all those years, like he's left it in a will or something.;D:rolleyes:

@ross. I'm not suggesting he did inherit the other 50% automatically. But the point was that the only reason he did not unify the titles is because his brother held it and they wouldn't fight.

Are you implying that in the absence of Vitali that Wladimir would not have been the undisputed champ? Because I think intuitively most ppl know that Wladimir definitely would have held the WBC as well the whole time.

What's more, your saying that Vitali fought half the dangerous opponents while Wlad only fought half.

Except Wladimir fought at a respectable rate for the HW champ. Had he had to go through the entire list of Vitali's opponents as well that would have brought him up to nearly 100 fights! 100 fights in this 230lbs super heavy era is outrageous, especially in the time frame required.

There are just too many opponents for that to have occurred in theory. It's like saying Lennox Lewis did not fight all the contenders because he failed to face guys like Byrd, Ruiz, Bowe, Wladimir, Sanders etc. And Lewis only had 44 fights whole career!

Basically you are implying Wlad's legacy is smashed because he happened to have a brother that held a belt too and fought opponents that Wlad did not. That's a bit much.

@erics44 Yeah his holding has been on the excessive in some fights but really only completely over the top in just one fight, Povetkin. But in between all the holding I think I seen a one sided beating the rest of the time as well. It was still dominanting. I think Wlad could have beat him without it. It's just the easiest way for him to do it.

It's not officially cheating anyway. It just sucked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

@erics44 Yeah his holding has been on the excessive in some fights but really only completely over the top in just one fight, Povetkin. But in between all the holding I think I seen a one sided beating the rest of the time as well. It was still dominanting. I think Wlad could have beat him without it. It's just the easiest way for him to do it.

It's not officially cheating anyway. It just sucked.

---

@Max Power this isnt really true, his holding is completely and hurrendously over the top in the vast majority of his fights

i gave lyle (el kabong, as big a wlad fan as you can get) the oppotunity to pick any fight in wlads second reign as champ to show me that this isnt the case

he suggested i rewatch the second sam peter fight, he said it was a master class of boxing

i watched the first 2 rounds, in the first he held over 20 times and punched with any kind of meaning considerably less

the second was only slightly better

and it is cheating, it is against the rules, the refs and officials clearly let him get away with it, any other fighter in the provetkin fight would have been dq'd

unless obviously that fighter made as many people rich each time he fights as wlad does

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

@erics44 Yeah his holding has been on the excessive in some fights but really only completely over the top in just one fight, Povetkin. But in between all the holding I think I seen a one sided beating the rest of the time as well. It was still dominanting. I think Wlad could have beat him without it. It's just the easiest way for him to do it.

It's not officially cheating anyway. It just sucked.

---

@Max Power this isnt really true, his holding is completely and hurrendously over the top in the vast majority of his fights

i gave lyle (el kabong, as big a wlad fan as you can get) the oppotunity to pick any fight in wlads second reign as champ to show me that this isnt the case

he suggested i rewatch the second sam peter fight, he said it was a master class of boxing

i watched the first 2 rounds, in the first he held over 20 times and punched with any kind of meaning considerably less

the second was only slightly better

and it is cheating, it is against the rules, the refs and officials clearly let him get away with it, any other fighter in the provetkin fight would have been dq'd

unless obviously that fighter made as many people rich each time he fights as wlad does

---

Well I don't know why El Kabong chose that one because before Povetkin, Peter was Klitschko's most clinchiest fight!

I've said it before, Wlad clinches the short asses because they try to rush him all the time, it's their only tool cause they can't box him otherwise so he eliminates that game. It's quite smart really.

When Wlad meets a tall guy like Thompson or Wach for example, suddenly, we don't see the hugging do we!! Punch speed and punch power wins him the fight!

Well we'll see if it's cheating wont we. My bet is, if he gets a ref who chooses to pull them apart and tell Wlad off, we will instead see Wlad pulverise his opponent all the same. Wlad even might use an uppercut!! haha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

@erics44 Yeah his holding has been on the excessive in some fights but really only completely over the top in just one fight, Povetkin. But in between all the holding I think I seen a one sided beating the rest of the time as well. It was still dominanting. I think Wlad could have beat him without it. It's just the easiest way for him to do it.

It's not officially cheating anyway. It just sucked.

---

@Max Power this isnt really true, his holding is completely and hurrendously over the top in the vast majority of his fights

i gave lyle (el kabong, as big a wlad fan as you can get) the oppotunity to pick any fight in wlads second reign as champ to show me that this isnt the case

he suggested i rewatch the second sam peter fight, he said it was a master class of boxing

i watched the first 2 rounds, in the first he held over 20 times and punched with any kind of meaning considerably less

the second was only slightly better

and it is cheating, it is against the rules, the refs and officials clearly let him get away with it, any other fighter in the provetkin fight would have been dq'd

unless obviously that fighter made as many people rich each time he fights as wlad does

---

Well I don't know why El Kabong chose that one because before Povetkin, Peter was Klitschko's most clinchiest fight!

I've said it before, Wlad clinches the short asses because they try to rush him all the time, it's their only tool cause they can't box him otherwise so he eliminates that game. It's quite smart really.

When Wlad meets a tall guy like Thompson or Wach for example, suddenly, we don't see the hugging do we!! Punch speed and punch power wins him the fight!

Well we'll see if it's cheating wont we. My bet is, if he gets a ref who chooses to pull them apart and tell Wlad off, we will instead see Wlad pulverise his opponent all the same. Wlad even might use an uppercut!! haha

---

ill give you the same question as i gave lyle, if you want to try and show me that he doesnt clinch that often, give me one of his fights and ill take a look

if you want me to watch thompson or wach let me know

and yes, his clinching is extremely smart, wins him the fight everytime and makes a lot of people very rich, which means he can get away with it a lot more, winning more fights getting richer, everyone is getting richer, and happier, so let him clinch and theyll get even richer

by the way, just to confirm one (or two) of the few facts in our opinionated debate, holding is against the rules as is pushing down on your opponent

by the way money doesnt always bring happiness :)