What Era would have Wlad not be top 3 though? I am very curious to hear your argument of 2 fighters, prime in the same era, that would beat Wlad handily 6/10 times. I am anticipating Frazer/Ali/Foreman, but I do not give Frazer too much of a chance against Prime Wlad simply because he would be a cruiserweight at most, and no cruiserweight, no matter how good, ever had success against Wlad. All his loses, legit or otherwise, are to very physically gifted fighters capable of absorbing a great deal of punishment, natural heavyweights well over 220 lbs and with tank like builds.
You would think that had he been so bad, someone would have exposed him sooner or later, no? It's not like he never fought and just faced Povetkin right after Klitschko :hey
anyone who can throw faster and hit as hard as a 37 year old retired nohoper can demolish wlad fast. Theres too many to list. I am sorry, but I am not going to sit here and draw up such a huge list. Whilst I appreciate his longevity, clean image and commitment to getting 120% out of his limited but effective style, and the fact the family ownage of hw titles, nothing deters from his weakness h2h. However I am not focusing on Wlad, I accept hes good at what he can do... its most of the rest of the scene that's the problem.
Charr is a lot better than people like you make him out to be... He's not a great fighter by any means, but he isn't ****. Definitely a live opponent, and to beat him like Povetkin did is definitely impressive.
Like who? 2 names, have to be from the same era. If Wlad was so fragile as to be knocked out by anyone that hits harder/faster than a 37 yr old no hoper, there is no way in hell he would have been undefeated for 10 years straight. He is not exactly avoiding anyone, he fought all the best opposition, and not once did he come close to losing.
My problem with you Herol is that you make categorical statements without a shred of evidence to back it up. You use epithets like "Always, Never, too many to list", which are a big no no in an effective argument, and are generally understood as being used by people that have no leg to stand on.
How is that proof? you said he is awful. I said "If he is that awful, then how come he hasn't lost to anyone since his Klitschko loss". Now you claim that as proof that he is awful? wtf?
you keep asking for 2 names. just list every dominant hw champ of the 20th century, and throw in the rest who were damn good too. I am not going to cut and paste from wiki for you, just take them all.
I claim he is awful by watching his awful skills for the first time. head down, rush in, arms out. repeat till defeated. not 'wtf'. Its me who should be saying 'wtf' to you for not watching the fights.
Sanders fists disagree with you. I don't know how to post pics of Wlad gtting demolished by Corrie but when I can, I will post this proof for you. once again I would remind you that this is not about Wlad, who I acknowledge is very decent at what he can do. He would be a contender in any era, no one can doubt that.
I wouldn't brag about the Cunningham win if I'm a Fury fan. If there's one thing I'll commend him for is traveling to further establish his name, other than that Cunningham is hardly a top tier Heavyweight.