Vladimir Klitschko, Top Ten Worthy?

[janitor]

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

But even Holmes has the luxury of going 48-0. And while Wlad is virtually unified (Barring his brother, which is a big crux against him), he still lost to multiple fighters. Brewster was a good, tough, strong, perhaps underrated fighter but not a great fighter. Not a fighter Wlad was supposed to lose too. Sanders had firepower, but he was pushing forty and Purity never should've happened.

It can be argued to some extent that Wlad has equal quality in his reign compared to Holmes. In fact, it could be argued to be superior considering his dominance in comparison to Holmes. It's an interesting prospect and point of reflection.

And that is how the question is likley to be played out!

[rusak]

Originally Posted by HomicideHenry

Outside of Walcott, Conn and Schmeling in Louis' reign, there isn't no one on the defense list of Joe Louis I could see beating Vladimir. Even at that, Conn is simply too small, and I think its safe to say Vladimir has surpassed Schmeling as the greatest European heavyweight of all time; Schmeling was good, but tended to be too methodical for his own good. Walcott is the only man in that list I could see beating Vladimir, but even then it wouldnt of come easy for Walcott either.

Schmeling is a slow runt counterpuncher. He has no chance against Vlad, gets beaten like he stole something. Walcott absolutely cannot take what Vlad dishes out and doesn't stay away enough, Vlad by brutal KO.

[orriray59]

Originally Posted by rusak

Schmeling is a slow runt counterpuncher. He has no chance against Vlad, gets beaten like he stole something. Walcott absolutely cannot take what Vlad dishes out and doesn't stay away enough, Vlad by brutal KO.

Fuck off you calling him a runt.

[orriray59]

I swear man, some fucking people, calling a world champion a runt. Get to fuck.

[Boxed Ears]

If someone has him just in at ten, it's not something I'd call them crazy for. There are some posters here that I respect that I seem to recall having him there already. He's not in mine. Over the last year and a half or so I've been reluctantly switching him back and forth with Jeffries as I thought and rethought it. Now, I've warmed up to the idea of having him there (15) where Jeffries was.

You can go back and forth about linearity and a one of the poorest losses we've seen out of the modern champs in a while, and the quality of his opposition, but in the end you still also have to contend with the fact that there were four major ABC belts and the Ring belt and of those five, he collected four, one at a time, to put them together, in an era and context where being the champion is possibly the most convoluted and confused idea it's ever been in boxing history. 17-0 streak in eight years and 14 consecutive title fights with some tough fighters and some very good fighters, despite no single truly great opponent, and he's the third longest actively defending heavyweight champion of the world, if I'm not mistaken. He's a tricky career to rate because there are interesting knocks on him but when you just look at the body of work, it's enough to stand on so that rating him just in the top ten is not outrageous at all anymore.

[orriray59]

Originally Posted by Skittlezz

It's very hard for me to see him over Lennox Lewis.

Down right impossible.


1-.Wladimir is one of the few- definitely the ONLY Modern Era Elite Heavyweight that might have lost out on an immediately rematch against a under dog upset.
What I mean is this: Tyson immediate rematch Douglas. I think Tyson pulls it off and beat Buster. Lewis immediate rematch Rahman.. he knocked him out. Can we honestly say Wlad would have been able to beat Sanders in an immediate rematch? I say no. If Wlad had rematched Sanders 3 months later. he would have gotten knocked out again.
The Sanders that went hard against Vitali in the first 2 rounds would have most likely knocked out Wladimir a 2nd time...


2- Wladimir himself strongly stated that he never under estimate opponents and is always in perfect shape. The reason that is important is we can not attribute any one of his losses to 'lacking focus or bad training'.. He was ready for Purrity. He was ready for Sanders. He was ready for Brewster. He still lost.

It wasn't that Wlad got lazy like Lewis did against Rahman and didn't train. Lennox displayed strong physical evidence during fights that he wasn't properly prepared in. Wladimir is always in top peak condition. This really reflects badly on him because it's not that he was under trained against Sanders or Purrity.. he just got beat.


3- Luck played a huge part into Wladimir's return to glory because his road to rebuilding came at the perfect time. A time stretch when the division lacked good punchers that could effectively end his comeback. A time stretch when the division lacked big stars.. hence they needed to build Wlad up again.


Imagine Wlad in the early 90's... He is hyped as the next big thing.. Early 90's. Get Ross Purritied.. That's one. What happens? Maybe he's given a 2nd chance..maybe not. Maybe they decided to feed Young Wlad against Prime Riddick Bowe.. since the 90's didn't need a star like Wladimir.. they had numerous stars in the HW Division..

Current Prime Wlad beats most of those 90's punchers.. but a young Wlad trying to rebuild and doing it in the 90's is miles and miles of difference apart from rebuilding during the mid 2000's.


Young Wlad in the 90's would have to go through a terrifying line up of 2nd tier fighters just to get to Lennox.Bowe and Holyfield.
Bruno-Morrison-Golota-Ruddock-Tua-Ike- these guys would have lost to Prime Wladimir.. but a rebuilding Wlad would have more than likely suffered multiple ko defeats..



Wladimir rebuild off wins against Williamson and Moli .... in the 90's he would had to rebuild off wins of Ruddock and Bruno. Possibly Tua.. a world of difference for someone with a shaky chin.

If Wladimir remains undefeated and actually fight someone of this ERA....instead of living off past glories.. He have a shot at top 10. Not yet though and to be quite honest I would not be surprised if his career ends on the back of a big right hand from Wilder or Price.

I will be upset though because I always dream of Wladimir over coming and over taking Lennox Lewis's shadow. I wish him the best of luck.

Good post.

[Seamus]

He's a lock for the top 10 by any measure. I see no rationale which could put Marciano, Johnson or Dempsey in front of him.

[orriray59]

Originally Posted by Seamus

He's a lock for the top 10 by any measure. I see no rationale which could put Marciano, Johnson or Dempsey in front of him.

Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Tyson, Holyfield, Liston, Louis, Foreman, Frazier, all rate over him. Which coincidentally leaves him at #10 in my list.

So yeah, Wlad scrapes it for me. But I can see the argument for Rocky.

[Seamus]

Originally Posted by orriray59

Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Tyson, Holyfield, Liston, Louis, Foreman, Frazier, all rate over him. Which coincidentally leaves him at #10 in my list.

So yeah, Wlad scrapes it for me. But I can see the argument for Rocky.

As time goes on, the fight for the Top Ten, by definition becomes more competitive. I do not have Liston or Frazier over him but certainly the rest.

[orriray59]

Originally Posted by Seamus

As time goes on, the fight for the Top Ten, by definition becomes more competitive. I do not have Liston or Frazier over him but certainly the rest.

It's difficult with Frazier for me because he beat the shit out of the greatest heavyweight ever which goes a long way to say the least.

[PetethePrince]

Marciano and Johnson have better records, better names, and recognizably great opposition on their records. Wlad has some longevity and a good string but it's tough to surpass the ATGs when Byrd and Haye are perhaps the best name on your record. I think it's also necessary and in some sense fair to put fighters of a certain style, particularly at HW (Bigger men, bigger damage, more wear & tear, etc) within a proper context. Marciano, Frazier, Dempsey, and even Tyson are never going to have the same kind of longevity as rangier boxer types like the Klitschko's, Lewis, Holmes, Ali, and even Louis. Tyson actually had a chance to do it because he started and became champion young but he sort of blew it. Either way, Tyson still would've probably fizzled out quicker than a bigger boxer type fighter.

If you don't, your HW list will just be littered with bigger boxer-puncher/mover types, and I'm not sure that's necessarily right. A blistering rise and strong, flashy dominance/hold on the title as that guy counts for something. If you appreciate dominance, KO's, some form of strong consistency, and that big name on your record than the Frazier, Tyson, and Marciano types should all make your top 10. Frazier has Ali, Tyson has his dominance, and Marciano has his dominance/consistency and undefeated record. And each of those men have far more forgivable losses. Let's be real when we can honestly assess that Wlad can't beat the #2 man of his era in the division. He's almost like Dempsey in this regard but for different reasons (Perhaps it is not the same and not as bad but it's a fair case to be made).

As for as I'm concerned, I can't rank Wlad higher than #11.

[Seamus]

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

Marciano and Johnson have better records, better names, and recognizably great opposition on their records.

Who does Johnson have better that was an established great heavyweight when he fought him? 154 pound Langford? Can you imagine the flack Waldo would get for fighting Sergio Martinez and calling it one of his best victory? A green Sam McVea or a .500 Joe Jeanette? A 5 year inactive Jeffries who had no warm-up fights? How about a 167 pound Tommy Burns? Again, would you be giving Wlad credit for fighting Kessler?

Marciano fought guys at the very end of their string... Charles went .500 for the rest of his career. Walcott let the tide of the division recede until he looked high and dry when in fact he was in his last two fights overstaying his welcome. Moore was an ancient light heavy.

Again, how would we react if Wlad tried to call Mormeck one of his great victories?

[SP_Mauler]

He's top 10 easy maybe even top5. Longevity should get him in no sweat.

Originally Posted by Seamus

He's a lock for the top 10 by any measure. I see no rationale which could put Marciano, Johnson or Dempsey in front of him.

Marciano undefeated HW champion 49-0 who knocked out the whole division is far more superior then anything Wladimir has done. There are plenty of good names out there to fight but he for some reasons chooses not too. We'll see his next opponent to prove my point.

Johnson if it was on fighting ability ranks ahead of Wladimir easy.

Dempsey I agree with you.

[Vladimir23]

Skittlez/FelixTrinidad is a bitter butthurt brittard Klitschko hater troll who has been banned thousands of times from ESB and the scene.

[Vladimir23]

http://www.boxnews.com.ua/photos/56/...-Mormeck13.jpg