Why the hate for big brother?

[Max Power]

Sorry powerpuncher but you have just upstaged yourself with that comment. Take a good look at 193lb Scmelling who today we would regard as a cruiserweight. Not one CW would come to fight looking like Scmelling today for a start and his style was so crude by today's standards he wouldn't stand a chance in that division today let alone against the heavyweights.

More the point, those giant heavies of the past Louis fought are NOTHING like the giant boxers that are common place today, where a 220lb 6'2" fighter might be considered "too small to make a serious impact!!" sometimes. Simon, Carnera, Baer, they were all absolute oafs! The Nikolay Valuev's of the distant past relying completely on their size to be effective. The big guys today are skilled fighters and tremendous athletes as well as being tall and heavily muscled.

In Louis's day the small guys had the skills. Today the big guys have the skills as well! Joe Louis was wasted by Scmelling and almost knocked out by Danni Devito look alike Tony Galento. What HW today would seriously be threatened by him? Louis is an ATG but he is no Evander Holyfield or David Haye and cannot really cut it with good big men. Only with acromegalic Carnera and co.

The real golden age was the 90's. More specifically from the crowning of Tyson to the 1st retirement of Vitali. This was a global era with the opening up of Eastern Europe in competition with great American and British heavyweights. It was an era of superheavyweight punchers and the most exciting fights ever captured on film.

[Max Power]

I never claimed guys like Austin were great in this era. Only that guys like that would be a handful for champs of the past.

Ali got dropped by Cooper, Louis got dropped by Galento. Austin would knock Cooper and Galento out without a fight!

[Beanz]

I thought @Saddo had started this thread in the wrong section.

[palmerq]

vitali has slowed down quite a bit from his entertaining best before his first retirement but he is still very far removed from a boring style in my opinion... he looks very awkward but he gets out the way of punches well and throws back and doesnt over clinch... Why do some people "hate"? errr because its the internets and that what people do if you like someone you make up reason why their great and if you dont then you make up reason why they are crap S: the truth is out there... somewhere :S

[thehook13]

No hate, fact remains they were seen as vulnerable in era where heavyweight competition was stepped up a gear. Not exactly a high gear at that.

The way they market themselves as atg does grate boxing aficionados due to the lack luster resume they both carry. the long enduring ring entrances and pre match pageantry is sickening. (though still entertaining) The boring style shameless style Wladimir possesses, I give Vitali credit where it's due though, he's tough as nails a lot more interesting

The arrogant righteous elitist position they take on their image is annoying and a turn off for anyone who prefers not to caress his balls. The slave contracts they have their opposition take because they have cornered the HW market is uninspiring. There's more

[Max Power]

Vitali Klitschko's resume consists exclusively of unbeaten or virtually unbeaten top ranked highly skilled fighters (since championship days) of which there are a lot of elite power punchers. How much better a resume can you possibly get?

The only difference between the quality of Lewis's resume which nobody questions and the resume of the Klitschko's is that the names on Lewis's resume are recognisable to American and British fans and that is the whole thing!

The stand out names for LEwis were Holyfield and Tyson which were past their best when LEwis fought them.

Ibragimov wasted Briggs and Holyfield.... Wladimir dispatched Sultan.
Williams bashed Tyson.... Vitali slaughtered Danny!

It's clear. The opponents of the Klitschko's are no worse than what Lennox had atleast at the time he fought them.

Golfer Corrie Sanders is no worse for example than Grocery store owner Zelijko Mavrovic!

[Max Power]

@Master

I'm not criticising the 1970's, Ali fought everybody who was anybody against some tough contenders and emerged the best. George Foreman, Larry Holmes also products of that great time.

I'm simply highlighting that if you scrutinise that resume some of his opponents were not exactly stellar and certainly overmatched!

Of the entire 70's the only heavyweights who would provide any serious level of competition to the 90's, 00's and today's landscape would be a 74 style Muhammad Ali (the 220lb lean version who beat Foreman not the skinny kid from the 60's or the fat plodder who lost to Leon) and not surprisingly Larry Holmes and George Foreman who did in fact compete in the 90's!

Muhammad Ali and Larry Holmes were the last of the great outfighters who were not particularly big punchers and had very limited inside game but made up for it with their handspeed and their range as well as advanced ring IQ. Foreman was the tanker of the 70's and 90's, could hit hard and take a lot of punches, a formula for success in any era and into advanced age.

Ron Lyle was a good fighter and tough opponent but seriously watch his fights. This isn't a masterful boxer or a particularly devastating hitter compared to what would come later. His fight with Foreman really outlined how limited both guys really were. I think he would do ok today but no better than any other Klitschko opponent.

And no chinny fighters like Frazier or Norton could ever hope to survive in an era of superheavyweight punchers I'm sorry but that's a fact!

[Master]

@Max Power praising Vitali is not a bad thing to do, he is a good fighter or was. However you do not have to critize the 1970's era. That is crazy.

Ali fought 3 greats and we never got to see his prime. Greatness is not determined by size otherwise Valuev would have been the greatest, it is determined by what they achieved, against top fighters, showing great courage, heart and determination.

[powerpuncher]

Sorry powerpuncher but you have just upstaged yourself with that comment. Take a good look at 193lb Scmelling who today we would regard as a cruiserweight. Not one CW would come to fight looking like Scmelling today for a start and his style was so crude by today's standards he wouldn't stand a chance in that division today let alone against the heavyweights.

More the point, those giant heavies of the past Louis fought are NOTHING like the giant boxers that are common place today, where a 220lb 6'2" fighter might be considered "too small to make a serious impact!!" sometimes. Simon, Carnera, Baer, they were all absolute oafs! The Nikolay Valuev's of the distant past relying completely on their size to be effective. The big guys today are skilled fighters and tremendous athletes as well as being tall and heavily muscled.

In Louis's day the small guys had the skills. Today the big guys have the skills as well! Joe Louis was wasted by Scmelling and almost knocked out by Danni Devito look alike Tony Galento. What HW today would seriously be threatened by him? Louis is an ATG but he is no Evander Holyfield or David Haye and cannot really cut it with good big men. Only with acromegalic Carnera and co.

The real golden age was the 90's. More specifically from the crowning of Tyson to the 1st retirement of Vitali. This was a global era with the opening up of Eastern Europe in competition with great American and British heavyweights. It was an era of superheavyweight punchers and the most exciting fights ever captured on film.

from that statement right there you lose all credibility from anybody who knows anything about boxing thus a debate with you is pointless.

[Max Power]

You cannot seriously be implying a champion from 80 years ago would be anything but a journeyman for a modern HW! Those are very rose coloured glasses your wearing if you are!

[powerpuncher]

you cannot seriously be considering that david haye is better than joe louis. again, talk to any boxing expert and they would all call you crazy.

[Max Power]

That depends on what kind of boxing "expert" your talking about? A historian? Means little to nothing!

A modern boxing analyst with no idealogical axe to grind will look at the footage of Louis, notice his rudimentary boxing skills in a sport that wasn't even technically complete yet (more of a barn yard brawl) coupled with his lack of speed, size, conditioning and power and conclude that Joe Louis would probably not be advised to box as a professional today (assuming he did not receive the same training and diet a guy like Haye has which changes the whole scenario).

To be simple, I give Louis about... FIVE SECONDS before Haye finds his jaw and KHTFO!

Louis fought not a single opponent who has any relevance to modern boxing at all.

Could you imagine how hard you would be laughed at were you to claim that a football lineman from 1930 could win best on ground in 2013 on a football forum? Sorry but comedy gold mate!

[powerpuncher]

the football analogy doesnt work because of the size difference between now and then. the linemen now are so much bigger now.

anyways, i am just going to assume that you have never actually watched anybody fight before the 90's because of the things that you say. joe louis is such a complete fighter. he is probably the best combination puncher that i have ever seen. he has great footwork and throws almost technically perfect punches.

you act like people in the 30's and 40's are the same as fighters from 1890. by the time louis came around, boxing had been around for a long time. its not as if it was still brand new. there were great training camps and they had great conditioning techniques. actually, the HWs back then were far superior conditioning wise than the HWs now.

go watch a sugar ray robinson fight and tell me that he wouldnt be relevant today.

i dont get why a boxing historians opinion means nothing when they have studied boxing for years and have seen so many fights and know so much more than you. that makes no sense at all. that just means that you want to be ignorant probably because it is bliss. thats what i hear anyways.

and again, saying that haye would KO louis in 5 seconds is beyond laughable and makes you look very uneducated in boxing history so if i were you, i would refrain from saying things like that so that for future reference people arent thinking that you are stupid.

[Max Power]

Of course SRR would be relevant today. But unfortunately for you and your kind I HAVE seen the fights. Joe Louis does not look like an all world beater today. Do you really think Haye would lose to Schmelling or get dropped by Tony Galento? Come man the quality of boxing is so bad nobody watches it for any reason other to compare how far we have come.

SRR had a WIDE wide open defence and when you analyse his ring craft and scrutinize his performances properly you see he doesn't really stand a chance against Mayweather and modern greats.

Sorry but you have exposed yourself as a nostalgist! And that's fine if you are, but you wont be selling me on a fantasy past that for the most part, never actually existed.

I've seen my fair share of fights to know the truth Mr. Puncher