Wlad Vs Other Careful Fighters

[Majesty]

I think the klitschko brothers gets grief because they are not American where the hype machine would be in full mode.

Let's take this for example, someone here posted in some other thread that Mike Tyson fought in a great heavweight division in his prime and was dominant. Really? Trevor Berbick? Pinklon Thomas? Bonecrusher Smith?
An over the hill Larry Holmes? An blownup light Heavy in Spinks? Razor Ruddock? Buster Douglas? Come on!

So what's wrong with the brothers being so dominant when this division isn't anywhere worse than Mike Tyson's day? They racked up KOs like crazy but they are considered to be boring, they don't take risks, etc.

because Mike Tyson didn't fight to the level of his opposition and carry people that were inferior to him, he knocked them out, he didn't fight like he was at a disadvantage.

[generalbulldog]

I think the klitschko brothers gets grief because they are not American where the hype machine would be in full mode.

Let's take this for example, someone here posted in some other thread that Mike Tyson fought in a great heavweight division in his prime and was dominant. Really? Trevor Berbick? Pinklon Thomas? Bonecrusher Smith?
An over the hill Larry Holmes? An blownup light Heavy in Spinks? Razor Ruddock? Buster Douglas? Come on!

So what's wrong with the brothers being so dominant when this division isn't anywhere worse than Mike Tyson's day? They racked up KOs like crazy but they are considered to be boring, they don't take risks, etc.

because Mike Tyson didn't fight to the level of his opposition and carry people that were inferior to him, he knocked them out, he didn't fight like he was at a disadvantage.

You're cherry picking man. The 2 brothers have been knocking guys out left and right in the heavyweight division. They get the job done and get the ko's. But you have people here bitching about Wlads last fight even though it was a KO in the 2nd round.

[Kev]

I think the klitschko brothers gets grief because they are not American where the hype machine would be in full mode.

Let's take this for example, someone here posted in some other thread that Mike Tyson fought in a great heavweight division in his prime and was dominant. Really? Trevor Berbick? Pinklon Thomas? Bonecrusher Smith?
An over the hill Larry Holmes? An blownup light Heavy in Spinks? Razor Ruddock? Buster Douglas? Come on!

So what's wrong with the brothers being so dominant when this division isn't anywhere worse than Mike Tyson's day? They racked up KOs like crazy but they are considered to be boring, they don't take risks, etc.

because Mike Tyson didn't fight to the level of his opposition and carry people that were inferior to him, he knocked them out, he didn't fight like he was at a disadvantage.

Let me ask you a question Majesty. Could Tyson have won all those fights any other way? Could he have been more cautious and kept at a distance and boxed his way to victory over guys like Holmes, Spinks, Ruddock etc?

Personally I think the way he fought was the least risky way for him to fight. He was small for a heavyweight but had exceptional speed head movement and ferocious power, all that spells get inside and wreck them.

If he would have fought any other way he'd not be playing to his strengths and would have been at a disadvantage. His style wasn't so much because of greater bravery and willingness to risk but rather that was how he needed to fight to win.

Klitschko has absolutely no reason to change his style. When he was crowd friendly he experienced being knocked out not once but three times.

He's a dominant world champ now aiming at unifying all the belts (apart from Vitali but I imagine he will vacate to let him win it eventually), he's a legend in Europe and earns millions every fight.

Why in the world would he risk that?

I can remember Tysons era and everyone at the time said it was a weak era. Even the era of Holyfield and Lewis was criticised at the time.

Boxing fans and the media are insistent on always harkening back to the glory days of Ali, Foreman, Frazier etc and therefore there will never ever be a decent heavyweight era again.

In reality its not that bad.

Wlad and Vitali are two of the most dominant heavyweight champs in history and would be tough for any champions from any era. Guys like Haye and Arreola provide KO excitement and brutal slugfests and there are some very talented technical fighters out there like Povetkin, Chambers, Solis etc who get no credit at heavyweight because they don't have the much heralded power but would be considered very solid fighters indeed in any other weight class.

The heavyweight division really isn't that bad at all. It's not so much the heavyweights that suck as just the AMERICAN heavyweights and because the world revolves around America its seen as a dearth of talent everywehere.

The fact is in Europe the heavyweight scene has probably never been better, even in the UK now our domestic heavyweight scene is probably our most lively division with Fury, Rogan, Sexton, Chisora, Pryce and the old guard of Williams, Harrison and Skelton. Fair enough no world beaters there but certainly more domestic talent than we've had in years where it was only ever Lewis, Bruno, Mason, Akinwande, Bent, Hide and Gammer who were any good over about a 15 year span.

The heavyweight scene is lively throughout the rest of the world, its just that most of the top fighters are technical rather than explosive knockout artists.

The heavyweight divsion is so unfairly treated though as unless there is a destroyer like Tyson (and he was a complete one of a kind) or and Ali (again the greatest ever) everyone will say its just shit.

No other division gets the same treatment. People don't lament the welterweight scene because there is no prime Ray Robinson there, the middleweight division isn't shit because we have no Hagler or Monzon but the heavyweight division always gets derided because the next Tyson, Foreman or Ali hasn't shown up yet.

[Majesty]

I think the klitschko brothers gets grief because they are not American where the hype machine would be in full mode.

Let's take this for example, someone here posted in some other thread that Mike Tyson fought in a great heavweight division in his prime and was dominant. Really? Trevor Berbick? Pinklon Thomas? Bonecrusher Smith?
An over the hill Larry Holmes? An blownup light Heavy in Spinks? Razor Ruddock? Buster Douglas? Come on!

So what's wrong with the brothers being so dominant when this division isn't anywhere worse than Mike Tyson's day? They racked up KOs like crazy but they are considered to be boring, they don't take risks, etc.

because Mike Tyson didn't fight to the level of his opposition and carry people that were inferior to him, he knocked them out, he didn't fight like he was at a disadvantage.

Let me ask you a question Majesty. Could Tyson have won all those fights any other way? Could he have been more cautious and kept at a distance and boxed his way to victory over guys like Holmes, Spinks, Ruddock etc?

Personally I think the way he fought was the least risky way for him to fight. He was small for a heavyweight but had exceptional speed head movement and ferocious power, all that spells get inside and wreck them.

If he would have fought any other way he'd not be playing to his strengths and would have been at a disadvantage. His style wasn't so much because of greater bravery and willingness to risk but rather that was how he needed to fight to win.

Klitschko has absolutely no reason to change his style. When he was crowd friendly he experienced being knocked out not once but three times.

He's a dominant world champ now aiming at unifying all the belts (apart from Vitali but I imagine he will vacate to let him win it eventually), he's a legend in Europe and earns millions every fight.

Why in the world would he risk that?

I can remember Tysons era and everyone at the time said it was a weak era. Even the era of Holyfield and Lewis was criticised at the time.

Boxing fans and the media are insistent on always harkening back to the glory days of Ali, Foreman, Frazier etc and therefore there will never ever be a decent heavyweight era again.

In reality its not that bad.

Wlad and Vitali are two of the most dominant heavyweight champs in history and would be tough for any champions from any era. Guys like Haye and Arreola provide KO excitement and brutal slugfests and there are some very talented technical fighters out there like Povetkin, Chambers, Solis etc who get no credit at heavyweight because they don't have the much heralded power but would be considered very solid fighters indeed in any other weight class.

The heavyweight division really isn't that bad at all. It's not so much the heavyweights that suck as just the AMERICAN heavyweights and because the world revolves around America its seen as a dearth of talent everywehere.

The fact is in Europe the heavyweight scene has probably never been better, even in the UK now our domestic heavyweight scene is probably our most lively division with Fury, Rogan, Sexton, Chisora, Pryce and the old guard of Williams, Harrison and Skelton. Fair enough no world beaters there but certainly more domestic talent than we've had in years where it was only ever Lewis, Bruno, Mason, Akinwande, Bent, Hide and Gammer who were any good over about a 15 year span.

The heavyweight scene is lively throughout the rest of the world, its just that most of the top fighters are technical rather than explosive knockout artists.

The heavyweight divsion is so unfairly treated though as unless there is a destroyer like Tyson (and he was a complete one of a kind) or and Ali (again the greatest ever) everyone will say its just shit.

No other division gets the same treatment. People don't lament the welterweight scene because there is no prime Ray Robinson there, the middleweight division isn't shit because we have no Hagler or Monzon but the heavyweight division always gets derided because the next Tyson, Foreman or Ali hasn't shown up yet.

Bilbo he wasn't knocked out because he was trying to be exciting.

If all you said was true then that would mean that he's still the limited fighter he was all those years ago when he got knocked out. If he was that same fighter he'd have been stopped by Peter.

He lost to Sanders because he didn't know how to hold and hadn't dealt with it. He lost to Brewster because he shot his load too early. If he was still the same fighter that went down whenever he faced adversity then Peter would have stopped him. You won't convince me that if he doesnt only jab jab jab and right hand that he is gonna get knocked out. He can afford to throw more and he can afford to overwhelm his opposition a lot faster then he does he has EVERY advantage over them yet he fights like he is the fighter that should be scared and not the other way around. Don't try to defend his lack of effort in pressing a fight and ending it sooner and with his range power and speed he would be blasting these guys out in 3 rounds, if anything he risks more by letting them stay in the fight so long rather then getting them out of there.

But if you think he hasn't improved at all as a fighter and is still the fighter that got knocked out all those times ago then feel free to believe that he can only afford to jab grab and right hand to win fights and will get knocked out otherwise. I on the other hand know he is 10 times better the fighter yet he doesn't fight like it at all and thats why its so frustrating watching him. If Mayweather had fought cautiously against Gatti nad only jabbed and ran away he'd get holy hell for it because they'd say he had an opponent in Gatti that he could have torn apart given his skills and no one would be defending him. Floyd didnt do that, he went in and demolished Gatti. Wladimer is the same way if he is in there with someone he should demolish and he doesnt even do that and underperformes he deserves the same flack. People ALWAYS ALWAYS give a fighter hell and love to say that "they had an opponent in there to look spectacular against and they didn't do a damn thing" EVERY fighter gets flack for that so why is Wladimer supposed to be exempt? Andre Dirrel ran an entire fight against Curtis Stevens and people said he was a miss prospect, overhyped, and won't go anywhere, HBO didnt wanna air his fights anymore and he got a lot of hate. But if Wladimer does it the excuse is "Why hate him for winning" its an annoying double standard. Its not so much a hate for Wladimer its the knowledge that you KNOW he can do much more and be twice as devastating and effective yet he doesn't use it. You can say "he doesnt have to" but why shouldn't he? Why shouldn't He show all he can do and blast people out? Why should he wait till an opponent has him in trouble to do other things? thats a pretty stupid way of thinking in my opinion.

"I have all the punches in the world but im gonna wait till im hurt to reveal them all"

his mentality should be

"I have all the punches in the world, im gonna get this guy out of there with them because I can and there's nothing he can do."