Wladimir plans to box for 10 more years to break Joe louis' record

[Max Power]

Actually your wrong, Lennox was going to fight Johnson until Johnson pulled out with an injury.

Look man, Wlad MIGHT or MIGHT NOT have beaten anybody as good as Sanders. But Haye, Peter, Ibragimov, Thompson, Povetkin, Chagaev, Rahman all could have been for example, Sanders certainly lost to lesser fighters than that! In the end that is irrelevant because LEwis himself never even fought Sanders! Who's to say that Sander's could not have got the early drop on Lewis either on the right night? He certainly COULD have!

But Vitali's comp was not bad. He fought the heftiest opponents with the best records of all time. Everybody was either a champion, past present or future, and unbeaten top contender or a veteran with a good record and/or otherwise a giant puncher.

And since LEwis, Vitali has simply punched the living shit out of ALL of his opponents so strikingly, without losing hardly a round, without ever being behind on pts, without hitting the deck...

When Lewis fought his LESSER OPPONENTS than Vitali... He was not so strikingly dominant. He sometimes got knocked out, he sometimes struggled with guys like Mercer etc, which Vitali would simply beat to a pulp! I see more consistency with Vitali than I do with Lewis.

That's how I can say that Vitali improved. I'm not basing it on the single best opponent like yoou are because that's convenient for Lewis since he fought Vitali last. I'm basing it on the fact that the general overall level of Vitali's opponents significantly picked up AFTER Lewis than he fought BEFORE, and his performance was held extraordinarily.

Have you even seen some of those fights? Nobody in their right mind would label that brother "boring"

[palmerq]

I am a big corey sanders fan .. but i think people are getting a bit carried away with his actual abilty... he beat wlad fair and square, wladimir was young and got ko'd.. Wladimir has definently improved since then, and fights a lot smarter now, it is strange to think(looking at the way he boxes now) but back in his earlier pro days he was very aggresive and it cost him.. Sanders was a pretty good guy, very tough and hit hard.... but he was a complete wild man who did not defend himself at all, he was very easy to hit.. He's a good opponent for a lot of guys but he was not at the top level in my opinion... Him v haye prime for prime would be a very interesting fight... I think haye would have ko'd him, but sanders had long arms he could have sent him to the floor just as easy.. Anyway sanders was great fun to watch and underrated but he was never that great.

as for vitali being in his prime when he face lewis... maybe we can compare the career of lewis and vitali .. vitali was 31 when he fought lewis and when lewis was between teh ages of 30-32 he had a very close fight against a competent but not world class boxer coming off a loss in ray mercer, some people on this forum even think mercer won that.. he went on to face shannon briggs and ko'd him in style but was wobbled badly twice.. Now lennox won these fights but in my opinion lennox definently improved after these fights to get his career best wins v holyfield and maybe even vitali.. Lennox certainly improved after turning 30 so i dont think it is far fetched that vitali improved a lot after the fight v lennox either..


Even though i am a big klitschko fan Lewis was a greta boxer and I do not know if vitali would have ever beaten him, obviously i believe he could have though !

[Max Power]

I am a big corey sanders fan .. but i think people are getting a bit carried away with his actual abilty... he beat wlad fair and square, wladimir was young and got ko'd.. Wladimir has definently improved since then, and fights a lot smarter now, it is strange to think(looking at the way he boxes now) but back in his earlier pro days he was very aggresive and it cost him.. Sanders was a pretty good guy, very tough and hit hard.... but he was a complete wild man who did not defend himself at all, he was very easy to hit.. He's a good opponent for a lot of guys but he was not at the top level in my opinion... Him v haye prime for prime would be a very interesting fight... I think haye would have ko'd him, but sanders had long arms he could have sent him to the floor just as easy.. Anyway sanders was great fun to watch and underrated but he was never that great.

as for vitali being in his prime when he face lewis... maybe we can compare the career of lewis and vitali .. vitali was 31 when he fought lewis and when lewis was between teh ages of 30-32 he had a very close fight against a competent but not world class boxer coming off a loss in ray mercer, some people on this forum even think mercer won that.. he went on to face shannon briggs and ko'd him in style but was wobbled badly twice.. Now lennox won these fights but in my opinion lennox definently improved after these fights to get his career best wins v holyfield and maybe even vitali.. Lennox certainly improved after turning 30 so i dont think it is far fetched that vitali improved a lot after the fight v lennox either..


Even though i am a big klitschko fan Lewis was a greta boxer and I do not know if vitali would have ever beaten him, obviously i believe he could have though !

And this @palmerq is pretty much EXACTLY my opinion on these issues in total. Respect!

I am fan of both boxers and believe they are not far removed as either side tries to sell.

As for Sander's you are right about his defense and wild style and that's precisely why he was was not a great fighter. What I would call him was a very DANGEROUS fighter because on a given night he had very high potential to cause an upset because of his unique qualities, but he could also be beaten soundly as well. You mean "Corrie" Sander's not "Corey", they are different boxers.

[palmerq]

You mean "Corrie" Sander's not "Corey", they are different boxers.

yes you are right there... i got that one wrong completley S: i meant the south african corey.... he was just great fun to watch, I do think if he was a better looking man and not from an obscure boxing country then he would have been a fairly big star(with a few more losses on his record but it would have been fun!)

[ross]

Jesus, listen ross. The WBC nolonger allows you to carry other titles. Defending all the belts is quite literally impossible! It's not a matter of want to or difficulty, it's impossible. So stop saying it.

Floyd Mayweather?

[Mr140]

Belts don't really mean much its the man who beat the man that has the Lineal champ titles defenses i think he is talking about really. Wald wbo is just kinda me and sure Louis comp was not greatest but he did beat the champ and defend it 25 times in a row. Wald when he fought the best rated fighter under him then he was champ after that. I think he has like 10 defenses when there was no one that was top dog and his Brother was not fighting pretty much his bro fucked things up for him.

[Max Power]

Well no the lineal champ does not much either to declare who the best boxer is either. What if the lineal champ has a bad night and loses to a lesser fighter who had a great night? That does F/A to make him worthy.

There's no hard and fast way but common sense says the more belts the better because the more top opponents in championship fights you had to fight to get them and defend them (duh).

The Ring title might not always be accurate but it does the best job at singling out who the REAL champ ought to be imo.

As for the lineal champ, some examples would be Buster Douglas beating Tyson doesn't make him greater than Tyson.

When Tyson unified the belts, Spinks... SPINKS! had the friggin lineal title!!!

George Foreman won the lineal title from Moorer (who imo was lesser than Holyfield who he won it from to start) and held it until Briggs, when we all know the best boxer at that time was by far Lennox Lewis whom Foreman would not even fight!

Wladimir holds all major belts besides WBC (yes, WBO although having a shaky beginning, IS a major title and today is regarded as such, look to lower weight ranges!) He also holds some minor titles and is recognised by The Ring, and to any sane person in boxing is also the lineal champ.

Get over it guys.. Wladimir is beyond doubt the greatest 200+ HW champ of ALL TIME on paper and soon enough will be the greatest HW champ of all time, in terms of achievement.. completely!

Facts!

[Mr140]

How can he be when does not face the best man that was in his era just can not deal with that. I was talking about his wbo before getting wasted by Sanders not meaning much. His Brother coming back fucked up his title reign because he was not fight the best guy in the division.

[Max Power]

Well actually it did mean a lot if you ask me. At that time ppl considered Wladimir the better brother (even though I think it was Vitali). And they also considered Wladimir the top dog in the division. WBO or not, THAT was the established champion in most ppl's heads. The Vitali/Lewis fight, The Sanders/Wladimir fight and the subsequent Sanders/Vitali fight let Wlad down but that's retroactive thinking.

You cannot just decide that based on what happened later that Wlad's championship wins as WBO champ then don't count. It did then!

[Mr140]

He was not the top guy though Lewis was he picked up a trinket big deal then went on lose to Sanders and Brewster after words. Now in his comeback he then was consdier the man and yea now his titles mean something when defending them. Unfortunately his brother shows up and now its fucked again you know why because they won't fight. So tell me who in the histroy of boxing that is in the top ten list did not fight the best possible guys they could. I know love the Brothers they are great and all but them being combined champions is going to hurt them more then help because then won't ever fight.

[Mr140]

So i think i am pretty much right when saying that Lewis was the best so Wald defending a wbo belt was kinda just meh means nothing really. Also you can not argue with ranking a man when he did not fight the best person in his era with is his Brother kinda fucked it up for him really.

[Max Power]

Yeah ok I guess I did not think that one through did I lol, Lewis was the top guy at the time you are right.

I'd still not knock Wlad's WBO belt defences off the list myself. I consider picking up any major title and defending it legitimate.

Otherwise you have to do the same for all other boxers who've been in that situation of not holding all the belts and no I don't single out the WBO either as not being major.

That Wladimir and Vitali didn't fight I can pass, they are brothers, they can't help that, that shouldn't preclude them from boxing greatness. They each fought their fair share of the toughest opponents on the planet, that's what counts for me.

Sure you'll point to collaboration etc playing up to each others strengths in opponent selection but really over a whole career that's not really possible, they both had mandatories.

If you want to set Wladimir back several fights from Louis over the earlier WBO defences go ahead but to me they are as legitimate as Lewis's first WBC belt and defences he was gifted by Bowe.

[Mr140]

All i am going to say is that when Louis, Ali, and Holmes were champs they were seen as the champs. Wald was not champ or seen as one in the first run. After the Bryde rematch and Samuel Peters fight he was then the man. Then his brother comes back he is not really the man anymore because he is not fighting the best guy in his era. Say what you want about weight and all but at least the guys in the top ten fought the best there was Wald has not regardless has to be down graded for it. Holyfeild has a few loses but he fought fucking every one and most of his loses were after his 40's, Tyson fought everyone, and Lewis fought everyone and avenged his loses, but the brothers split there shit up and never fought one another they kinda fucked up. Shit most people consider them the same person hard to judge if they never fight its a big problem dude.

[Max Power]

Alright I'm going to give this to you, those past champions were considered "the champ" in their title fights or straight away thereafter (i.e. Ali vs Foreman etc). Whereas Wladimir was for instance not considered the top dog for earlier defences.

I guess there will be many different levels of what the set record is.

I think "performance in world title fights" as I refer to is applicable, you see further criteria that penalises many boxers but particularly the brothers. This is exactly what I was referring to at the start of this thread, the closer Wlad gets to the record, the further detractors will attempt to push the boundary out.

Well I have a cherry picked statistic of my own too, one that I feel is more relevant than all others.

Performance in 200+ World title fights.. What we would TODAY consider HW!

It's then clear that no matter how you spin it, Wladimir tops with Louis a distant 7th place!

What do you think of that record!

[Mr140]

Well a heavyweight today is different then it was 60 years ago my friend i don't take that into account. The fact is he was a heavyweight and the guys he fought were consider heavies. I would say if they had all the shit we have today to make you stronger and bigger they might do just as well. I think the fact that for so much of Wald title reign he was not consider the man mostly because of his brother. Should he get a pass and not be put down notch for not fighting the best there was. All those guys on the list fought the best people they could i sure as shit don't have Jack Dempsey there he would not fight black people which is bullshit and fucks his legacy up because he did not fight the best. There has never been a top 10 champ who did not face the best there was until you get to the brothers i am not saying its fair but it effects it for me.