Wondering how people still feel about this pfp list, as voted for by us:
http://i884.photobucket.com/albums/a...P4P29-6-10.jpg
edit: if someone can make that link an image I'd be grateful, doesn't seem to want to work for me.
I was thinking about this the other day and Fenster is absolutely correct. Heavyweight is the only division where Wlad can have a 20lb weight advantage and it's the only division where he's likely to have a 6 inch height advantage.
In any other division he wouldn't have those advantages and he sure as hell wouldn't be anywhere near as effective.
Anyone with eyes can see that he is dominant because of his physical advantages. He reminds me of a heavyweight version of Andreas Kotelnik, only with a better jab and p4p he obviously hits harder.
I just think his dominance says more about the level of (or lack of it) competition at Heavyweight. I think if you took away his physical advantages he wouldn't really stand out, and for me that's why he wouldn't be in my top ten.
http://instagram.com/jonnyboy_85_/
Remove Mike Tyson's power and he would never have been dominant at all neither. Remove Kid Gavillan Jaw and he would have never been as dominant neither.
What makes a good boxer is a mix of everything. Size is one of the many factors, some know how to use it and to make it deadly (Wlad, Lennox, Vitali among others), some aren't talented enough (Valuev). It's an advantage but it's definitely not the beginning and the end of it all.
Hidden Content
That's the way it is, not the way it ends
The definition of these p4p rankings are to take size out of the equation and determine a boxer's other attributes. It has been that way for decades. You can't just redefine what it means now.
Okay for the people who say size should be considered in these p4p rankings. Who here believes that Wlad should be ranked higher than Pacquiao and Mayweather?
Maybe we should start a thread with a new poll.
Tyson and Gavilan were the same size as their opponents. This is what you're not getting. Fighters can have superior power, chin, speed at any weight. Only fighters in the heavyweight divison can bring a huge size advantage to the table.
Wlad's ability can't be fairly judged in reality, considering his massive size advantage over almost everyone, let alone how he would match up against Mayweather or Pacquiao.
A good big'un will always beat a good little'un. That sums Wlad up.
And you need to do some homework on Foreman. He may have been perceived as huge compared to his opponents but that's quite simply not true. Especially compared to the size advantages Wlad has over his today.
Last edited by Fenster; 08-20-2010 at 06:32 PM.
3-Time SADDO PREDICTION COMP CHAMPION.
Hidden Content
That's the way it is, not the way it ends
Skel? I am Fenster.
I agree that Wlad has good technique, a good jab, packs load of power and has no killer instinct (he has a china-chin so you can't blame him for the safety first approach) but he is also much bigger than virtually everyone he fights, hence why he is not P4P worthy.
Take away his size advantage and his skills are not anything special.
3-Time SADDO PREDICTION COMP CHAMPION.
Take away his size advantage and you have a very solid boxer/puncher with big power in the left hook and right cross and a jab that does damage all fight long, decent defense, and very good ring generalship.
I think Wlad is a very skilled heavyweight because once someone gets as big as Wlad it's hard for them to retain the skills he has...he's very quick despite how big he is, he's athletic, he's powerful....the only guy you can really compare him to with size as the common factor is Lennox Lewis and I think Wlad fights in a more textbook manner than Lennox did. Meaning I think Lennox was flashier and probably improvised a bit more but Wlad sticks to his guns and he's a damn good fighter
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks