Who has the better resume, Wlad or Frazier?

Wlad has has defended his title six times in the last three years,with only one defense coming against a non-ranked heavyweight - Hasim Rahman,who,like I already stated,was a late replacement for mandatory challenger and top ten rated Povetkin.



Wlad has been the clear number one in his division since he beat Byrd in the rematch,that's the difference.Until Frazier fought Ellis,he couldn't call himself the best heavyweight in the world.He won his "title" against an unranked opponent,and had defended it against men Ellis had already beaten.The Ellis fight established Frazier as the best in his division.



Regardless of whether those boxers had once been ranked,they were no longer ranked by the time Frazier had fought them.They were no longer top contenders or relevant to the division at that particular time.

Yes,Frazier managed to hide his blindless while so many other boxers - including a stablemate of his - were caught and forced to retire.What a sneaky genius Frazier is.He fooled them all! :roll:



In regards to him being too heavy against Foreman - even Frazier acknowledged that it didn't make a difference.

 

Well i'd argue that early in his reign people rated vitali better, just as people rated ali better. Both frazier and wlad proved themselves the best.

What does that have to do with anything? I made no claims I just have a notable resume for each man.

Simple, both had 5 years at top, both beat some good guys and missed some good guys. However frazier has his win over ali to separate them both.

Any response you have will probably be answered here so if you make another point do me a favour and quote this as the reply

 

Vitali was retired and no longer relevant when Wlad beat Byrd.After he retired,Byrd was recognized as the best heavyweight in the world and was rated as such.



You claimed that Frazier had "ruled" for five years,when,in actuality,he only ruled for three years.Wlad's reign began after he established himself as the best in the division by beating Byrd,just as Frazier's began after he beat Ellis.



Wlad has a consistency of fighting rated contenders that Frazier could only dream of.Ever since he beat Peter the first time,it's been nothing by top ten rated challengers - with the only two exceptions being a late replacement and a mandatory contender.One single win isn't enough to negate that,no matter how highly you rate it.Consistency and dominance against rated opposition is what matters most,and Frazier never had that.

 

The reason why this is a lame question is because the Hw division was stacked back in Fraziers day. Jimmy Young had a better resume but he wasn't a 10 year champion. This is like saying "Well, since gas was .50 a gallon in '72 and its 3.50 a gallon now it must be better now. Apples and Oranges.....

 

I forgot to mention, I voted them as being about equal, and for this thread, I'm only taking wins into account since it looks like that's what the OP did.

I'm always wondering what the best way is to account for an exceptional win like Ali in determining resume strength while being fair to those who beat highly rated competition without the "wow" win. The best way I've come up with so far is to have it count for multiple high level wins-in Wlad's case, either another current beltholder or top 3 Ring rated fighter if that fighter didn't have a belt (like Chambers). Say that single exceptional win is worth between 3-5 really good wins on another fighter's resume. Then the two's resumes would look pretty similar.

Granted, it could turn into a slippery slope because there's room to argue which wins should count for extra and which shouldn't, but Ali-Frazier (like Schmeling-Louis, Douglas-Tyson) is a clear case where it's deserved IMO. If anyone's got a better way to balance out measuring resume strength that gives proper weight to the biggest wins while still crediting very good, but unspectacular ones, I'd be glad to hear it. :thumbsup

 

frazier its no contest , just liek if these 2 ever fought

frazier 205 vs wlad 240

wlad siimply cant keep frazier off him and doesnt see the 10th round and dont give me this wlad is much bigger crap , wlad fights scared , the reason foreman hammered frazier is because foreman was a destroyer and never fought scared...an aggressive walk forward big puncher

wlad is not this and that why he would be beaten half to death by frazier

 

lol...

 

Based on what?

 

I remember there was a big thread here on the board where the two sides were fiercly arguing Wlad vs. Frazier.

I think it was a year or two ago and the Frazier proponents kept saying Frazier would have no trouble traversing the distance and dropping big hooks on Wlad's chin without taking much punishment himself.

I disagreed then and disagree now.

 

i. agree. with. you. :|:|

 

You Klitschko nut gulpers need to stop smoking the crack.

How does Wlad rate near/over Smoke when Wlad has the KO losses to guys who wouldn't have made it out of the first round with Joe?

Exactly what kind of logic are you idiots using?

 

did you see the guy i was arguin with, you're gonna flip your lid at this one. get ready.

the idiot said Wlad has been the tru champ for 5 years running whilst Frazier was only ever the true champ for 3 years hence wlad is a better champ than frazier ever was! and the ali victory isn't enough to swing it!

 

I can't believe this question was even asked.

Even Frazier's Jerry Quarry wins are better than any of Wlad's.

 

Its decided.

The Klitschko nut gulpers are now officially even more delusional than the *******s...