Reason's Why Wladimir Klitschko Is Not An ATG

The standard criteria for ranking fighters.

 

IOW, you have no clue?

 

I agree with that post. Also, Marciano, Holmes, Tyson, Lewis, Luis, and most of the other fighters are not ATGs, cause they never beat a prime ATG.
In the matter of fact, here's my HW ATG top 10.

1)Ali ===> beat Frazier
2)Frazier ====> beat Ali
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)

The rest of the spots are empty.
The Klitschkos are definitely not ATGs. They are not even black, they are not under 200 pounds, and they are not even from America. AND they are not from 60 years ago.

 

Yeah, size is a big part of Wlad's game but I think the way he uses that size shows some skill. He's clearly not on a skill level of guys like Charles, Walcott, Holmes, etc but when you combing his size and stength with the skill set he does have then you have a pretty good heavyweight.

I'd agree the way Tyson and Dempsey took care of their opponents was impressive and much more exciting. But, Wlad is very dominant in his own way. He doesn't score the early and exciting ko's but he thoroughly outclasses his opponent and then knocks them out. If you were to say Tyson and Dempsey with the early ko's is more impressive than I wouldn't argue against that but I think a case can be made that dominating for 8-10 rounds and then scoring a ko is just as impressive.

For me, what hurts Wlad is his losses. I think the wins on his record holds up well with most heavyweights. He has no one great on there but I think he's beaten a lof of good fighters and usually convincingly. What hurts him is his 3 losses and 2 of them were close to his peak it sets a celing on how high he can actually climb.

 

Resume
Dominance
Longevity
H2H Ranking

You know, standard? The same basic **** that practically everyone rates fighters on? I didn't think it needed explaining, but hey...

 

LOL...

Resume? Klitschko's resume reads like the cast members of the Walking Dead. Get serious. Klitschko has not beaten a decent HW in the whole of his career.

Dominance? See resume.

Longevity? See Sanders then see Brewster.

H2H ranking? Are you ****ing kidding me?

Again, you have no clue?

 

Yeah, I'm not going to get into some fatuous argument with someone who calls himself Nay_Sayer. Wlad's a top 15 Heavyweight.

You do your thing though. Always be opposing. People love it, man.

 

you've always been an idiot... You are saying Haye or Byrd aren't decent... let alone Peter, Brewster, Rahman (some past their prime, others not). Dominance? do you even know what it means... it means being on top for a long time and winning in convincing fasion for close to a decade (which answers longetivity). i am not even going to talk about H2H because i really don't want you to respond... please do me a favor and delete your account.:happy:happy:happy

 

Haye, Peter, Chambers, Chagaev, Rahman, Thompson, Ibragimov, Byrd, Mercer, Barrett......All DECENT heavyweights so that's that argument ****ed

He's dominated everyone he has faced since 2004 so that's your second point ****ed

He's been champion since 2004 so that's the point on longevity ****ed

I agree with the H2H

 

Let's see your top 10

 

He is ATG no doubt, but he does have 3 KO losses without facing any ATG fighters, even if he lost to some ATG but put up a good fight it would look better for his legacy but i cant say its his fault, his legacy hurts the fact that second best fighter is his brother and so he never faced second best fighter of his time, however based on his dominance in last years he is ATG heavyweight.

 

top 100 ATG is still ATG LOL ... I think its a common view Wlad is solid top15 HW
and starts knocking to the top 10 door, if he stays undefeated for like 3-4 more
years (around 10 more wins) then he may easily be considered between top
5-10 ATG on longevity (as ring/unified champion) and KO ratio alone.

If Wach beats him this Saturday Wlad still has the locked position between top15-20.