Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-10-2007, 11:45 AM   #16
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,747
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko - the next Joe Louis?

Wladimir Klitschko is a good fighter, but frankly I can't see any basis for rating as an all time great, or least not until we see how the rest of his career pans out. He has 3 bad knockout losses, one of whom was to a journeyman, another to a 38 year old fighter, who was fighting on average once per year and juggling a golfing career, and one to an okay fighter. He avenged his loss to the last one, but only after Brewster had fought once within a two year period.

Wlad's best wins are against fighters who were decent, but against none who particularly stand out as being legacy builders for a great champion.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 09-10-2007, 11:47 AM   #17
Luigi1985
Cane Corso
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,326
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko - the next Joe Louis?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo
Wladimir Klitschko is a good fighter, but frankly I can't see any basis for rating as an all time great, or least not until we see how the rest of his career pans out. He has 3 bad knockout losses, one of whom was to a journeyman, another to a 38 year old fighter, who was fighting on average once per year and juggling a golfing career, and one to an okay fighter. He avenged his loss to the last one, but only after Brewster had fought once within a two year period.

Wlad's best wins are against fighters who were decent, but against none who particularly stand out as being legacy builders for a great champion.
Agreed. He didn´t beat one great fighter until now, but let´s wait and see, he´s only 30 years old...
Luigi1985 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 11:51 AM   #18
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,747
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko - the next Joe Louis?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luigi1985
Agreed. He didn´t beat one great fighter until now, but let´s wait and see, he´s only 30 years old...
Thus far, he has but 3 defenses of the IBF crown, and has previously held the WBO which I have not, nor ever will consider to be a true world title. A 243 pound Samuel Peter floored him, and has yet to recieve a rematch. I suspect Wlad will continue to accumulate title defenses given that there's no one available at this time who I can rate as a truly qualified contender.

This is not a fighter who I can draw comparisons to Joe Louis with. If he manages to stay on top of the boxing world for another 7 or 8 years, then perhaps we'll have something to go by, but that's a pretty big IF.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 06:23 PM   #19
Muchmoore
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko - the next Joe Louis?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dempsey1238
More like Rocky Marciano or Tyson or Patterson imo.

No way will Wlad rein as long as Louis did. But he can make a good 4 or 5 year run as Patterson, Tyson or the Rock.
Tyson and Marciano would make Wlad their big goofy girlfriend.
 Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 10:13 PM   #20
semichin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko - the next Joe Louis?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendoza
This topic is controversial since Louis was one of the best heavyweights of all times, and Wlad still has a few prime years left on his career. What we can compare is ring records, quality of opposition, and styles.


Raw numbers:

Louis was 69-3, winning 95.8% of his fights.
Wlad is 49-3, winning 94.23% of his fights.

Edge Louis.

Louis has 55 Ko’s in 72 fights, for a KO% of 76.36
Wlad has 44 Ko’s in 52 fights, for a KO% of 84.61

Edge Wlad

Louis is 25-1 in world title matches! Simply amazing, though the competition wasn’t always good, and Louis like received a gift or two from the judges in decision fights.

Wlad is 11-2 in world alphabet title matches.

Edge Louis


Raw #’s = 2-1 edge for Louis


Offenses:

Both men had great offenses with top level hand speed. Klitschko’s sheer height , reach and weight advantages means he can hit and not be hit mostly on his terms. This makes a difference as Louis had trouble with boxer types, and gave up many rounds to the likes of Farr, Conn, and Pastor. Wlad is very dominant in the ring, and the best boxer types are lucky to win 3 rounds vs him as this includes guys like Byrd, Castillo and Brock.

Edge Wlad.



Defenses / Chins: Neither man took a great punch, though it could be argued that Klitschko has fought more dangerous punchers as a group. I tend to believe Louis took a better of a punch, but not by a significant margin. Defensively it seems like Wlad gets hit less. He has a better guard, better foot speed, and clinches better. Louis has more stamina. Hearts appear to be about even..

Edge: Even

Quality of Opposition: The quality of opposing between the two is slightly in favor or Louis, though Wlad has some big fights ahead of him.

Critics:

Louis has few critical points against him. He hardly defended his title against any black fighters. The best opponents he faced were Marciano, Charles, Walcott and Schmeling. His record vs these men is 3-3, however if you give Walcott the first fight on points, its gasp 2-4.

Wlad has been Ko’d three times, and though he is the clear #1 guy in his era, legacy fights and the lineal title are not in the cards for him due to modern boxing’s political fragmentation. The Brewster match proved Wlad can avenge his losses. A re-match with Sanders, and a title unification could further Wlad’s legacy. If neither is available, then Wlad will need to win many more title defenses.

Conclusion: You have to give Louis the edge at this moment in time, though in a pure boxing sense the two are comparable in many areas.
Pretty good analysis
 Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2007, 11:57 PM   #21
Marciano Frazier
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,469
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko - the next Joe Louis?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendoza

Raw numbers:

Louis was 69-3, winning 95.8% of his fights.
Wlad is 49-3, winning 94.23% of his fights.

Edge Louis.

Louis has 55 Ko’s in 72 fights, for a KO% of 76.36
Wlad has 44 Ko’s in 52 fights, for a KO% of 84.61

Edge Wlad

Louis is 25-1 in world title matches! Simply amazing, though the competition wasn’t always good, and Louis like received a gift or two from the judges in decision fights.

Wlad is 11-2 in world alphabet title matches.

Edge Louis


Raw #’s = 2-1 edge for Louis
Further consider that knockout percentage isn't nearly as relevant as the other two, and Wlad's still-inferior "title fight" record is made up of phony title fights.


Quote:
Offenses:

Both men had great offenses with top level hand speed. Klitschko’s sheer height , reach and weight advantages means he can hit and not be hit mostly on his terms. This makes a difference as Louis had trouble with boxer types, and gave up many rounds to the likes of Farr, Conn, and Pastor. Wlad is very dominant in the ring, and the best boxer types are lucky to win 3 rounds vs him as this includes guys like Byrd, Castillo and Brock.

Edge Wlad.
I think this one's a little unfair- I'll agree Wlad's style is better-suited to small boxer types than Louis', but Louis was obviously much better at handling durable/aggressive puncher types


Quote:
Defenses / Chins: Neither man took a great punch, though it could be argued that Klitschko has fought more dangerous punchers as a group. I tend to believe Louis took a better of a punch, but not by a significant margin. Defensively it seems like Wlad gets hit less. He has a better guard, better foot speed, and clinches better. Louis has more stamina. Hearts appear to be about even..

Edge: Even
Um, if Wlad has the better offense and they're even in the "defense/chin" category(which apparently also includes footspeed, stamina, heart, etc.), then how could you possibly account for the enormous gap in their results? Louis has two stoppage losses in 71 pro fights, both to world champions and Hall-of-Famers and one while he was nearly a decade over the hill. Wlad, who has only 52 fights to date and is still very much in his prime, already has not one, not two, but three stoppage losses to run-of-the-mill opponents.

Quote:
Quality of Opposition: The quality of opposing between the two is slightly in favor or Louis, though Wlad has some big fights ahead of him.
Slightly in favor of Louis? Louis fought eight world heavyweight champions and two light heavyweight champions. Around three-dozen(or about half) of his total fights were against currently-ranked opponents. Wlad has never fought a linear heavyweight champion, and has fought only four paper champions(two of whom had their paper titles because they beat Wlad, and one of whom was a shot 41-year-old). Wlad has had around 15 fights against currently-ranked(by any credible body) opponents, or about 30%. Louis is on another planet in terms of opposition faced from Wlad.

Quote:
Louis has few critical points against him. He hardly defended his title against any black fighters. The best opponents he faced were Marciano, Charles, Walcott and Schmeling. His record vs these men is 3-3, however if you give Walcott the first fight on points, its gasp 2-4.
You're obviously ignoring the fact that he was 36-37 years old coming out of retirement after a 2-year lay-off to pay up the IRS when he lost to Charles and Marciano. Counting those losses against Louis would be silly and biased.

Quote:
Wlad has been Ko’d three times,
This is not something to skirt around. Wlad has been knocked out, in his prime, healthy and well-managed, three times, by opponents of no historical consequence. This is a far, far cry from Louis, who was only beaten by Hall-of-Fame champions and only once while in his prime.

Quote:
and though he is the clear #1 guy in his era, legacy fights and the lineal title are not in the cards for him due to modern boxing’s political fragmentation. The Brewster match proved Wlad can avenge his losses. A re-match with Sanders, and a title unification could further Wlad’s legacy. If neither is available, then Wlad will need to win many more title defenses.

Conclusion: You have to give Louis the edge at this moment in time, though in a pure boxing sense the two are comparable in many areas.
The gap between these guys is enormous at the present time. If Wlad were to continue dominating the division for at least another six or seven years, then this might become a conversation.
Marciano Frazier is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2007, 07:57 AM   #22
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,291
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko - the next Joe Louis?

Quote:
Marciano Frazier Further consider that knockout percentage isn't nearly as relevant as the other two, and Wlad's still-inferior "title fight" record is made up of phony title fights.
Both guys can hit. Give Wlad those 6 oz punchers gloves and pit him vs the bum of the month guys, and he's a life taker. Don't you agree?

Quote:
I think this one's a little unfair- I'll agree Wlad's style is better-suited to small boxer types than Louis', but Louis was obviously much better at handling durable/aggressive puncher types
This is because Louis jab was not good enough to keep smaller boxers off him, and his footwork and defense could be exploited. Put Wlad in there vs Simon, and Carnera, and I bet you he tee-'s off and finsihes them faster than Louis did. There is no way guys like Farr or Pastor go the distance or make the fight close vs Wlad.

Quote:
Um, if Wlad has the better offense and they're even in the "defense/chin" category(which apparently also includes footspeed, stamina, heart, etc.), then how could you possibly account for the enormous gap in their results? Louis has two stoppage losses in 71 pro fights, both to world champions and Hall-of-Famers and one while he was nearly a decade over the hill. Wlad, who has only 52 fights to date and is still very much in his prime, already has not one, not two, but three stoppage losses to run-of-the-mill opponents.
This is because Wlad fought more skilled punchers. Sanders, and Brewster, for example are far more skilled than the Galento's and B.Bears of boxing. They hit harder, have faster hands, and far better finishing ability. Louis had enough to get " off the hook " vs the other guys, but like I said they were not as talented. Switch dance partners between the two, and perhaps WLad has one less KO, and Louis has one more.

Quote:
Slightly in favor of Louis? Louis fought eight world heavyweight champions and two light heavyweight champions. Around three-dozen(or about half) of his total fights were against currently-ranked opponents. Wlad has never fought a linear heavyweight champion, and has fought only four paper champions(two of whom had their paper titles because they beat Wlad, and one of whom was a shot 41-year-old). Wlad has had around 15 fights against currently-ranked(by any credible body) opponents, or about 30%. Louis is on another planet in terms of opposition faced from Wlad.
Linear does not define competition. Most of Louis title defenses are no better than Wlad's. As I said before, Louis best opponents were Schmeling, Walcott, Charles, and Marciano. In these 6 fights, Louis has a 2-4 record if you give Walcott the first fight on points. While Louis does have a great win over Max Bear, the wins over past their prime guys like Sharkey, and Carnera are but " name " wins over past their prime fighters.

Quote:
You're obviously ignoring the fact that he was 36-37 years old coming out of retirement after a 2-year lay-off to pay up the IRS when he lost to Charles and Marciano. Counting those losses against Louis would be silly and biased.
Yet, Marciano and Charles were 2 of the 4 best fighters Louis meet. While Louis was older, he had many warm up fights.

Quote:
This is not something to skirt around. Wlad has been knocked out, in his prime, healthy and well-managed, three times, by opponents of no historical consequence. This is a far, far cry from Louis, who was only beaten by Hall-of-Fame champions and only once while in his prime.
Louis chin to me is not much better. The difference is in the skill and speed of the punchers the two faced. It only takes but a cursory glace of the films to see what I am talking about.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013