Fat Dan: Wlad "one of the greatest heavyweight champions in history"

[Nay_Sayer]

Originally Posted by Manning

So if Wlad went back in time and beat a prime Ali that wouldn't count due to Ali starting his career as a light heavyweight. Is that correct?

So, are you trying to compare Chris Byrd to Muhammad Ali?

This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about; a PRIME example of the ridiculousness of Klit Licker "reasoning".

I ask again, exactly WHO has the Baby Klit ever beat?

And BTW, Ali Never fought professionally as a light heavyweight, Genius...

[RUSKULL]

I completely & totally agree with Dan's opinion.

[Nay_Sayer]

Originally Posted by Sheikh

who did dempsey and jack johnson beat? how about liston?

What does Dempsey's and Liston's resumes have to do with the FACT that the best name on Wlad's resume turned pro as a super middleweight?

[RUSKULL]

Originally Posted by Asterion

I rank Wlad in the lower part of my Top10. I think he's done more than guys like Johnson, and arguably Tyson.

However, Holmes is clearly above Wlad. He has more defenses, he was undefeated for more time and didn't have embarrasing loses early in his career. Yes, Holmes ranks higher.

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Holmes
4. Lewis
5. Marciano
6. Foreman
7. Frazier
8. W. Klitschko
9. Liston
10. Tyson

Wlad will soon be 37, btw.

I am a well known Klitschko fan & I agree with you, Holmes still ranks higher. Wladimir would need a few more defenses & he'd have to unify the last belt, the WBC his brother now holds, to possibly pass Holmes. Even then it would depend on who he beats & how.

[RUSKULL]

Originally Posted by Nay_Sayer

What does Dempsey's and Liston's resumes have to do with the FACT that the best name on Wlad's resume turned pro as a super middleweight?

It has everything to do with it you knob.

[Nay_Sayer]

Originally Posted by RUSKULL

It has everything to do with it you knob.

Sure, anything you say, Klit Licker...

[RUSKULL]

Originally Posted by Nay_Sayer

Sure, anything you say, Klit Licker...

I only lick the finest of clits my friend............

[Nay_Sayer]

Originally Posted by RUSKULL

I only lick the finest of clits my friend............

And Wlad's klit is at the top of your list.



lol...

[Boxed Ears]

Let's be honest. Dan doesn't realise that if Volo were living an alternative lifestyle, he'd be up in someone like Hugh Jackman's arse. No way in hell would someone like Rafael get some Volo ****. Volo doesn't even have a drinking problem to give him any hope of that happening. This praise is all for nothing, really.

[krazylegs]

Originally Posted by JAB5239

He was 24-0 against Puritty, 40-1 against Sanders and 42-2 against Brewster as well as having fought world class fighters and having a world class amateur background. If he wasn't prime (and he was) than how do you justify everyone calling for him to fight Pulev, Arreola, Price, Mitchell etc.? Shouldn't these fighters be allowed to develop the way he did if he if fact was not prime?

Originally Posted by JAB5239

So how do Klitschko fans justify this question?

If he wasn't prime (and he was) than how do you justify everyone calling for him to fight Pulev, Arreola, Price, Mitchell, Fury etc.? Shouldn't these fighters be allowed to develop the way he did if he if fact was not prime?

Prime has absolutely nothing to do with being 24-0, 40-1, 42-2, or anything else that relates to your record. It's when you become a complete and the best form of a fighter that you can. Boystov is 31-0, Wilder 25-0, and it means nothing.

And how can we justify him fighting the fighters you mentioned, is because they are quality "Contenders". No one that i have read has ever stated that these fighters are in their prime, although they possibly could be, and this might be the best or the furthest they ever make it in the division.

As for them being allowed to develop, that is not for Wlad or us to decide. That rests solely on their management team and the fighters confidence in themselves. And if he doesn't start fighting some of these guys, the rest of the names with higher total bouts boxed and won, have either already been defeated by a Klitschko, or in the word you love, way past their primes.

He also cant fight more champions because he has already beaten them, or they retired. But more then anything else, he has been champion so long himself, no one else can claim to have been one. Besides the Cruiserweights that move up, Haye, Adamek, Cunningham, Huck, JCG, and we've seen what happens in those fights.

[JAB5239]

Originally Posted by devon

Not when you consider the fact that Norton was at the tail-end of his career and Holmes was in his prime.

We'll have to agree to disagree. The Holmes fight was arguably the best showing Norton ever produced.

[JAB5239]

Originally Posted by krazylegs

Prime has absolutely nothing to do with being 24-0, 40-1, 42-2, or anything else that relates to your record. It's when you become a complete and the best form of a fighter that you can. Boystov is 31-0, Wilder 25-0, and it means nothing.

And how can we justify him fighting the fighters you mentioned, is because they are quality "Contenders". No one that i have read has ever stated that these fighters are in their prime, although they possibly could be, and this might be the best or the furthest they ever make it in the division.

As for them being allowed to develop, that is not for Wlad or us to decide. That rests solely on their management team and the fighters confidence in themselves. And if he doesn't start fighting some of these guys, the rest of the names with higher total bouts boxed and won, have either already been defeated by a Klitschko, or in the word you love, way past their primes.

He also cant fight more champions because he has already beaten them, or they retired. But more then anything else, he has been champion so long himself, no one else can claim to have been one. Besides the Cruiserweights that move up, Haye, Adamek, Cunningham, Huck, JCG, and we've seen what happens in those fights.

I'm sorry but what you just described are peak years. Wlad was undoubtedly in his prime for all those fights even if he hadn't fully developed his game.

As for the rest of your post.. if that is true than we can't take away from Louis, Holmes, etc. since they had much of the same circumstances. Agreed?

[JAB5239]

Originally Posted by gobblock

Wladimir Klitschko has more than made up for his losses that are now in the distant past, as evidenced by his consensus status as one of the ten greatest heavyweights of all time and his ongoing historic title run. Similarly, none of the fighters he's beaten will be labeled shitty fighters for the rest of their life for having lost to him at any stage of their development, prime or not.

Let that sink in.

Now that you understand that much, we can continue. It isn't Klitschko's job to decide if his challenger is at the peak of his career or if he'll be better in six months or three years. Guess whose interests a fighter has in mind? His own. He's not the guardian and protector of the people he fights. He fights the best he can find and he always has.

Look, you're a nuthugging moron, we've already established that. But since you like to throw out bogus claims than why don't you provide links to all the credible sources who already rank Wlad a top 10 all-time great? I'll be happy to counter this with more credible sources who don't. Man up!

[Juv]

Fat Dan is a Klitschko nut-hugger.

That much is apparent.

[krazylegs]

Originally Posted by JAB5239

I'm sorry but what you just described are peak years. Wlad was undoubtedly in his prime for all those fights even if he hadn't fully developed his game.


As for the rest of your post.. if that is true than we can't take away from Louis, Holmes, etc. since they had much of the same circumstances. Agreed?

Which is why majority of the people don't take that away from Louis and Holmes, and the reason they are considered ATG and top 10.

Wlad is and has been rated in most credible top 10 P4P lists for a while, competing against every fighter in every division to make those list. And he's there with many great and some ATG fighters, while other miss the list. That says more about him then his opposition. Especially when you take into account it very hard for heavyweights to make those lists, the last 2 being Lewis and Holyfield ATGs.

Now I generally dislike those list myself, putting little stock in them, since it's a little bit or a ridiculous assumption. I also dislike fantasy match ups against past greats, because Nostalgia can be very difficult thing to overcome, and in reality is just one persons perceptive vs another. So i try to look at it this way, could fighter A, give Fighter B a competitive fight, that either could win, taking into account every attribute possible. And if you can say yes, that's a very good complement.

What do you consider when talking about prime, Age only?