Wlad is the most underated HVY champ ever, Marciano most overrated

I'm not so sure about Haye being mentally weak (he's just generally not as good as some people think he is) but I agree it's far from guaranteed that he would beat Marciano. I could see it ending up something like Froch's fights with Taylor and Groves.

 

I give Wlad a lot of credit for coming back like he has.

But the question I've asked in my post, is fair.

If he's that great, why did he get knocked out three times in his 20's and struggle with Peter?

Yet because he's come back and dominated guys, who far the most part aren't anywhere near great, people believe he'd have handled Tyson, Holmes, Frazier and Foreman etc without any issue at all.

I'm sorry, but I just don't buy it.

 

Thanks! :good

 

I respect your opinion.

The Valuev and Wlad fights tell me he's mentally weak.

:good

 

Ross Purrity, Corrie Sanders, Lamon Brewster all disagree with you...

 

You're arguing with a guy that continually asserts that Wlad went "life and death" and was "lucky" to beat Sam Peter.

 

There's no double standards.

Sometimes fighters get beat.

Sometimes they're caught like Lewis.

Sometimes there might be other factors.

But Wlad got beat three times in his 20's. Two of those losses were in his late 20's.

He's come back and dominated for ten years, but he's not dominating great fighters.

I think he has changed since his losses, but I don't think he's a completely different fighter.

I think is defence is better, because he's worked at it, but also because he fights ultra cautious, and his physical advantages come into play more against lesser fighters.

I don't want to criticise him, but I just don't see how he would easily have beaten the guys that I've mentioned.

I'm not saying you have said that, but in similar threads, we've got guys saying he'd beat Foreman, Frazier and Tyson etc like they were nobodies.

I think that's a gross exaggeration.

 

What fights did you watch?

At points, he was in major trouble.

Sam Peter isn't a great fighter.

So four non great fighters have caused him major problems, yet according to some, Holmes etc would have been a walk in the park for him.

 

Paquiao's resume is light years ahead of Klitschko's. The two don't belong in the same sentence...

 

Actually yeah, I do. Especially the Morales loss.

 

The difference is, Morales was an elite guy.

Sanders, Puritty and Brewster weren't.

 

So, you agree that one of the Klitschkos is amongst the best?