If Wladimir Klitschko goes undefeated for 2 more years..

We're already in Febraury 2012. In a year and a half (August 2013), Wlad will have a longer reign than Larry Holmes. Only Joe Louis will beat him in longevity.

I don't think Wlad can break Louis' record, though. Impossible. Wlad should fight until he's 38-40 years old.

He's already past his prime. Obviously he won't start fighting 3 times a year.

 

2 more years, what is that like 2 fights

 

If Wladimir Klitschko goes undefeated for 2 more years...he still won't be fighting a pay for veiw.

 

Wlad is ofcourse a great fighter, but IMO. he can still loose on a whim. Vitaly I am sure will not be beaten (unless by age or injury), but Wlad I feel can loose to almost anyone. Ofcourse most of the time he won't lose but I don't think it is certain at all that he will go 2 years undefeated.

 

I agree. That's the ghost of his early losses.

 

He is still possibly the best-earning HW in history, so he probably couldn't care less whether he was ppw in the US?

 

Right, and if you can get inside and land, you better get something done quick, or else he's wisely gonna tie you up and smother you, then push off and start his destruction of you, all over again.

 

I don't think Wlad can go on for as long as some of you think. His footwork, reflexes and handspeed will slow with age, and he relies on these a lot more than guys like Foreman and Holyfield did- and doesn't have the chin of Vitali (or Foreman and Holyfield for that matter) to make up for slowing down with age. Two more years is realistic, but four or more could be a bad idea. He's had over 60 fights after all

 

not sure if serious...or just ******ed.....

 

great analysis noob atsch

 

Tyson and holyfield earned a whole lot more than the klits have so far

 

Vitaliy always do better Volodymyr...this will no change.

 

Vitali is my favorite heavyweight. Vlad can continue to fight or several more years, probably well into his 40's. He should just try to continue to beat his mandatories one at at time, clean the entire division out................

 

I'd only count the defences from when he became number 1 and then only against guys who've atleast been top ten ranked at some point in their career.

 

Hard to say exactly where he would rank. He is currently not in the top 10 but is top 15 for me. While he has been dominant, he had those shocking losses early on during a more competitive era. He's dominated in what has been a weak era and never had a signature win like many former greats. Louis had the Schmeling rematch which was a hugely significant fight at the time and he looked very impressive to confirm his greatness. Tyson crushed Spinks during his weak era in his most significant fight at that point and like Louis looked like an all time great in doing so. Wlad easily beat Haye in his most significant fight but didn't impress by imposing himself fully against a clearly over matched opponent and hardly looked like a fighter who could be compared favourably to the like of Joe Louis.

But I think Wlad's true standing as an ATG will only be clearly defined after he has retired. The opponents he beats near the end of his career and how they do after his retirement may add or detract from his final legacy. If an opponent he beats goes on to be a dominant heavyweight champion with a title run of a few years then his standing will rise, especially if he goes on to be an ATG himself which would finally give Wlad that win over an ATG that he sorely lacks. But if his opposition gets swept aside with ease by a new generation of fighters it will only highlight how weak his opposition was. Time will tell.