How do you beat Wlad?

No, the problem is today's heavyweights are not very good.

Do you really think Wach Is a good fighter?

He's just a big guy who if you stand in front of him will hit you with his ham hocks and knock you out. He's got no skill or talent.

Wlad rules a weak division, he's an atg for sure and a great fighter but stop trying to make out today's era as something it clearly isn't

 

foreman would gas too early to have more than 50% chance to tko Wlad.
Vitali... he doesn't hit very hard if he would KO Wlad it would be somewhere late with his face broken.

Dempsey... no.
He avoided the best fighters and Willard was a farmer.

Tyson... tko.
Though his style was weak against lateral movement and Wlad could exploit his weak inside game with clinching.
Possibility that Wlad gets knocked down 2-3 times in the first three rounds to then come back strong and finish Tyson.
60-40 chance for Tyson?

 

Cleveland Williams, Tex Cobb every era has fighters like that.

(The Cleveland Williams Ali fought had 10 feet intestines removed was literally shot, crippled...)

 

Foreman wouldn't gas. Wlad wouldn't go to his body. And Wlad would use lateral movement and not give Foreman just a body to beat on.

If he did, Foreman would end things quickly. Wlad is not Ali. When he starts taking punishment, he tends to fold, but he also can't move around the ring like a young Ali and eventually he would start gassing, lose confidence, and start taking big shots.

Dempsey did avoid Wills, which I'm assuming you're talking about, but if Dempsey's management knew any better, they would have realized Dempsey's style was all wrong for Wills. Even Jack Johnson acknowledged this.

Dempsey also has the style and the speed to get underneath Wlad's shots and end him early. The later the fight goes on, the more the fight favor Wlad because Dempsey is a small heavyweight.

Regardless, Wlad doesn't have a big heavyweight's jaw. And Dempsey had a big heavyweight punch. Williard could take a beating.

Tyson is all wrong for Wlad. He has a great chin, would force the pace, and had monsterous hooks and speed.

He would knock Wlad out. I'm 100% sure of it. Foreman is also a bad style because he's too mean for Wlad. He would take Wlad's shots, walk him down, and stop him.

 

Yeah... in the 8 years since Wlad has been dominating the division... there just aren't any good heavyweight boxers in the entire world. That makes a ton of sense.

Some of you people need to go outside and get some fresh air. If you actually believe that these guys, who are at the top end of boxing in the ENTIRE WORLD just "aren't very good".... then you really need to get a better grasp on life and reality.

You are probably watching the wrong sport.

 

Aside from Haye and Vitali, to be honest, there aren't that many good heavyweights, but Wlad is still a great fighter.

That doesn't mean he's unbeatable though. No fighter is unbeatable.

 

Well, I disagree. So begins the wonderful world of make believe fights that can never happen, hence.. can never be proven right or wrong. Pointless conversation.

 

Who in your opinion is a good heavyweight though?

Outside of Vitali and Haye?

 

Nobody said that he was unbeatable. It's true that no boxer is. However, you are still talking madness. Throughout Wlad's reign he has taken out many top end fighters. Just because they don't have huge names with star power doesn't mean that they are any less talented. That what people don't seem to understand. David Haye barely... if you even think he did... beat Valuev. Chris Byrd, Sam Peter, Calvin Brock, Chagaev, Ibragimov, ect... these guys were all very good fighters. They were all considered threats and all besides Byrd (who was the Champ) were undefeated when Wlad beat them. Chagaev beat Valuev in much more clear fashion than David Haye, yet you name Haye as elite with Wlad and Vitali and say the rest aren't very good. Well... that just doesn't make sense.

 

Educated Pressure + Relentless Body Work= TIMBER!

 

I'll give you Chris Byrd, but I disagree about Sam Peter, Chagaev and Ibriganov.

Ibragnov failed to impress against an ancient Holyfield and was hardly impressive in his ESPN fight against Ray Austin.

His performance against Wlad was pathetic.

Chagaev was average at best. He did get past Valuev, but it could have gone either way.

Other than that, what has he done?

Calvin Brock was a good fundamental fighter, and one of Wlad's best wins, but Tyson fought plenty of Calvin Brock level fighters, that were in better shape and had more experience and better assets, yet people say Tyson fought bums.

Haye beat Valuev decisively in my opinion. Valuev barely landed any shots. Sure, it was boring and cautious, but you have to hit your opponent to win rounds. Valuev couldn't manage to do it.

Haye also dominated John Ruiz and Chisora. Those guys are just as good as anyone Wlad beat with perhaps the exception of Byrd who was made for Wlad.

Chisora would be a much harder fight for Wlad than Byrd. Chisora is a higher skilled version of Sam Peter.

But anyway, I have to disagree with Wlad fighting in a good heavyweight era.

That still doesn't mean Wlad isn't a great fighter because he is doing what he needs to do in a weak era, and that's dominating.

 

You saw Wlad tag Wach with power shots the whole fight. Wach tags Wlad and he is in trouble, holding on like a *****.

 

Unfortunately Wlad will never get that much recognition because he's been fighting in a really weak HW era, there's no denying it.

 

Some good posts here. A relentless pressure fighter, with a great chin and power and good handspeed will trouble Wlad. Don't see any guys like that coming up.