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

[THE PHILOSOPHER]

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!

[ElTerribleMorales]

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

[Beanz]

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.

[Peter Plys 44]

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.

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?

[Beanz]

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.

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.

[Peter Plys 44]

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.

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

[Peter Plys 44]

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 :-(

[imp]

Whether 100 years from now or a 1000 years. There will never be another ali..but there will be plenty of vlads. And that says it all.

[El Kabong]

Whether 100 years from now or a 1000 years. There will never be another ali..but there will be plenty of vlads. And that says it all.

ummmm yeah no, I don't think so. There's not going to be another champion this dominant for a while. There will be other champions, there will other title holders, but I think you're missing the point that Wlad could match or even break Joe Louis' 25 consecutive successful title defenses and that my friend is pretty fucking amazing....as in it's been over 60 years since it has happened

[Fenster]

Wlad has never been a true dominant champion. You can't be the no.1 without 100% establishing it.

Unfortunately Vitali's presence has prevented Wlad from ever being crowned THE true heavyweight champ.

Vitali might have slaughtered him, for all we know. And one loss completely changes everything.

[El Kabong]

Wlad has never been a true dominant champion. You can't be the no.1 without 100% establishing it.

Unfortunately Vitali's presence has prevented Wlad from ever being crowned THE true heavyweight champ.

Vitali might have slaughtered him, for all we know. And one loss completely changes everything.

Is that your only argument? So Wlad has a brother and has refused to fight his brother and vice versa and THAT hinders his legacy That's bullshit is what it is.

Vitali will retire and Wlad will run the division by himself for as long as he likes at this rate