Boxing Forums



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Results 1 to 15 of 52

Thread: Wladimir cracks the POUND FOR POUND Ratings

Share/Bookmark

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    8,641
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1402
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Wladimir cracks the POUND FOR POUND Ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by Bilbo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Nameless View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by generalbulldog View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
    Here is Tyson's height/weight advantage when P4P ranked (1986-1989).

    (a couple of inches/pounds either way have been ignored)

    Berbick - none
    Bonecruser - none
    Thomas - none
    Tucker - none
    Biggs - none
    Holmes - none
    Tubbs - none
    Spinks - none
    Bruno - none
    Williams - none

    That's zero combined height/weight advantage over ANY opponent. In most cases Tyson was giving both height and weight away.

    Here are Wlads height/weight advantages since he won the IBF title.

    Byrd - 6" shorter, 25lbs lighter
    Brock - 5" shorter, 15lbs lighter
    Austin - none
    Brewster - 5" shorter, 15lbs lighter
    Ibragimov - 5" shorter, 20lbs lighter
    Thompson - none
    Rahman - 5" shorter, none
    Chagaev - 5" shorter, 15lbs lighter
    Chambers - 6" shorter, 30lbs lighter

    So Wlad has fought ONLY three guys where he didn't have a HUGE combined height/weight advantage.

    His SIZE is clearly his greatest attribute. Eradicating SIZE is exactly what P4P is meant to do. Fact.
    Tyson was a HW phenom that didn't have a huge weight, height, reach advantage over opponents. He deserved that p4p #1 ranking. I think possibly ALi and Marciano would have been #1 as well.

    Taking weight out of the equation, this subjective list factors in fighters' recent results, as well as their style, resilience and punching power.
    BBC Sport - BBC pound-for-pound world rankings


    Again boxing's p4p list takes weight/size out of the equation to rank the best fighter regardless of what they weigh. That has been boxing's criteria ever since the list popped up decades ago.
    Exactly. That's what I have highlighted. There's a world of difference between a heavyweight phenom and an athletic big man that is heavily favoured by a huge size advantage.
    Lennox Lewis had the same kind of advantage against his opponents, so did Big George. Does it make them any lower in the list of the P4P of their time or in the list of the best HW of all time? IN a division where there is no physical limitations, why should we discriminate such factors that helps them? Isn't Valuev the proof that size is not everything, after all? I would like to have your opinion on that matter.
    Following that argumentation, I would say that we should not consider those who have been blessed by ultra speed because it's unfair to the others and because it doesn't mean that they are that good, just saved by speed. We could say that also with strength or Jaw, it's one of the many things that help winning a boxing match)
    Would Wlad be smaller, he would fight differently and would be probably faster, for example. He did learn to fight with what he has and he's done it pretty well and he's not only "big and tall", he also has power and a damn good technique(albeit un-exciting).
    What about, let's say Paul WIlliam? Is he any good or it's just because he has a freak reach and size and therefore shouldn't be classed at all because he's just saved by his size?
    You seem to be having a hard time understanding "equal weight." Paul Williams has to weigh the SAME as his opponents.

    George Foreman did not have a huge combined size advantage in his pomp - he is around 6'3 and 220lbs. Check Ali, Frazier, Norton et al.

    Lewis only flirted with P4P around 2000. His resume, and I would say talent, was is in a different stratosphere to Wlad's.

    Valuev destroys your argument. He is the perfect example of how a GIANT with a modicum of boxing ability can take advantage of his HUGE size to beat smaller men.
    This is simply not true at all though. Valuev got to where he was through effective management and corrupt scoring rather than beating anyone.

    I know hardly anybody who has watched the first John Ruiz fight, the Evander Holyfield fight, the Larry Donald fight, and of course the Haye and Chagaev fights and who thinks Valuev deserved to win any of them.

    He 'won' those fights because he was a carnival freak who added curiousity interest to the heavyweight division. In other words, he got the decisions despite losing on the scorecards. His true record in the eyes of most who have seen his fights should read at least 5 losses now. Valuev has only ever beaten a single name opponent in a woeful Lyakhovich. If anything he has proven that exceptional size leads only to exceptional slowness, he has not beaten anybody in a fair fight.

    Which top 10 heavies do you think Valuev beats? I would say none of them, which is why he never faced any and managed to somehow get to two world titles through boxing politics rather than boxing ability.
    Fenster is right imo, if Valuev was a 6 3 225lb fighter with the skills he has would proabably not even good enough to become pro never mind fighting for a world title, his sheer size got him further than he could ever have dreamed of if he was the size I said above.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    This Lunatic Asylum
    Posts
    23,278
    Mentioned
    428 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    3133
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Wladimir cracks the POUND FOR POUND Ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by skel1983 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bilbo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Nameless View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by generalbulldog View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
    Here is Tyson's height/weight advantage when P4P ranked (1986-1989).

    (a couple of inches/pounds either way have been ignored)

    Berbick - none
    Bonecruser - none
    Thomas - none
    Tucker - none
    Biggs - none
    Holmes - none
    Tubbs - none
    Spinks - none
    Bruno - none
    Williams - none

    That's zero combined height/weight advantage over ANY opponent. In most cases Tyson was giving both height and weight away.

    Here are Wlads height/weight advantages since he won the IBF title.

    Byrd - 6" shorter, 25lbs lighter
    Brock - 5" shorter, 15lbs lighter
    Austin - none
    Brewster - 5" shorter, 15lbs lighter
    Ibragimov - 5" shorter, 20lbs lighter
    Thompson - none
    Rahman - 5" shorter, none
    Chagaev - 5" shorter, 15lbs lighter
    Chambers - 6" shorter, 30lbs lighter

    So Wlad has fought ONLY three guys where he didn't have a HUGE combined height/weight advantage.

    His SIZE is clearly his greatest attribute. Eradicating SIZE is exactly what P4P is meant to do. Fact.
    Tyson was a HW phenom that didn't have a huge weight, height, reach advantage over opponents. He deserved that p4p #1 ranking. I think possibly ALi and Marciano would have been #1 as well.

    Taking weight out of the equation, this subjective list factors in fighters' recent results, as well as their style, resilience and punching power.
    BBC Sport - BBC pound-for-pound world rankings


    Again boxing's p4p list takes weight/size out of the equation to rank the best fighter regardless of what they weigh. That has been boxing's criteria ever since the list popped up decades ago.
    Exactly. That's what I have highlighted. There's a world of difference between a heavyweight phenom and an athletic big man that is heavily favoured by a huge size advantage.
    Lennox Lewis had the same kind of advantage against his opponents, so did Big George. Does it make them any lower in the list of the P4P of their time or in the list of the best HW of all time? IN a division where there is no physical limitations, why should we discriminate such factors that helps them? Isn't Valuev the proof that size is not everything, after all? I would like to have your opinion on that matter.
    Following that argumentation, I would say that we should not consider those who have been blessed by ultra speed because it's unfair to the others and because it doesn't mean that they are that good, just saved by speed. We could say that also with strength or Jaw, it's one of the many things that help winning a boxing match)
    Would Wlad be smaller, he would fight differently and would be probably faster, for example. He did learn to fight with what he has and he's done it pretty well and he's not only "big and tall", he also has power and a damn good technique(albeit un-exciting).
    What about, let's say Paul WIlliam? Is he any good or it's just because he has a freak reach and size and therefore shouldn't be classed at all because he's just saved by his size?
    You seem to be having a hard time understanding "equal weight." Paul Williams has to weigh the SAME as his opponents.

    George Foreman did not have a huge combined size advantage in his pomp - he is around 6'3 and 220lbs. Check Ali, Frazier, Norton et al.

    Lewis only flirted with P4P around 2000. His resume, and I would say talent, was is in a different stratosphere to Wlad's.

    Valuev destroys your argument. He is the perfect example of how a GIANT with a modicum of boxing ability can take advantage of his HUGE size to beat smaller men.
    This is simply not true at all though. Valuev got to where he was through effective management and corrupt scoring rather than beating anyone.

    I know hardly anybody who has watched the first John Ruiz fight, the Evander Holyfield fight, the Larry Donald fight, and of course the Haye and Chagaev fights and who thinks Valuev deserved to win any of them.

    He 'won' those fights because he was a carnival freak who added curiousity interest to the heavyweight division. In other words, he got the decisions despite losing on the scorecards. His true record in the eyes of most who have seen his fights should read at least 5 losses now. Valuev has only ever beaten a single name opponent in a woeful Lyakhovich. If anything he has proven that exceptional size leads only to exceptional slowness, he has not beaten anybody in a fair fight.

    Which top 10 heavies do you think Valuev beats? I would say none of them, which is why he never faced any and managed to somehow get to two world titles through boxing politics rather than boxing ability.
    Fenster is right imo, if Valuev was a 6 3 225lb fighter with the skills he has would proabably not even good enough to become pro never mind fighting for a world title, his sheer size got him further than he could ever have dreamed of if he was the size I said above.
    Exactly skel.

    Even if you think Valuev got a few dodgy decisions, his huge size advantage prevented those fighters from dominating or sparking him. Not his boxing ability. His size.

    Larry Donald - “Valuev was able to make it look, just by his sheer size, that he was hitting me even when he wasn’t.”

    Evander Holyfield - "He's a tough opponent, the sheer size of him is of course the main factor but he fights well with it too"
    3-Time SADDO PREDICTION COMP CHAMPION.

  3. #3
    El Kabong Guest

    Default Re: Wladimir cracks the POUND FOR POUND Ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by skel1983 View Post
    Fenster is right imo, if Valuev was a 6 3 225lb fighter with the skills he has would proabably not even good enough to become pro never mind fighting for a world title, his sheer size got him further than he could ever have dreamed of if he was the size I said above.
    Actually I think Valuev is so big it hinders him, he may very well have been BETTER if he was smaller and by "better" I mean skillwise not in record.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11-13-2007, 02:10 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-02-2007, 06:08 AM
  3. Replies: 44
    Last Post: 01-05-2007, 04:39 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Boxing | Boxing Photos | Boxing News | Boxing Forum | Boxing Rankings

Copyright © 2000 - 2025 Saddo Boxing - Boxing