Top 13 h2h heavyweights in history

Thats just hokum. Losses count unless the loser is old and shot ie Tyson vs Danny Williams.

I want to know how Wladamear was not peak when he took his losses?

If Purrity was his only loss and he stopped Brewster in the third , people would be saying those years were his best.
As is , people still say he looked his best against Mercer and that was before he lost to Sanders, Brewster and Willaimson.

If Doug Jones had just put an extra round in the bank against Ali , would people brush away that loss? No, it would count.

Which is why the Purrty loss is a legit loss. If Micheal Grant can beat Purrity with less experience and fights than Wlad , there is no excuse to be made for Wlad losing to him.
Therefore no case can be made for this guy beating an ATG when he couldn't make it past a journey man.

 

So, in your monumental intellectual capacity, Jim Jeffries is better head to head than Ali because a 1905 Jeffires would almost surely beat 1981 Ali?

Sound thinking.

 

Hah:huh

They past primers. When had Wlad ever been past prime?

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

Yes i know every world and olympic champion were garbage
only Lennox Lewis was great.This is the reason why McCall destroyed
the prime Lewis in the second round and Rahman in the 5th.
I don't wanna forget every Lewis' victim was a prime atg in 100%
perfect shape.
Especially the bum Phil Jackson,the mental problematic,
McCall,the holding king featherfisted Akinwande,the asthma problematic bum Briggs,the fat Tua,the bum skinny neverbeen Mavrovic,the tired Holyfield who was garbage against the unbeatable
Ruiz,the glass-chinned bum Grant,the mental and physical health problematic Golota,the fat,slow Tua who has only one remarkable
(lucky it was the referee's fault) win against Rahman,
Vitali Klitschko outclassed the 100% prime Lennox (another lucky
Lewis win,Lewis showed zero power and skill,everybody can win by cut), and first of all the problem king Tyson.
The fat Tucker and the stamina problematic Bruno weren't in prime.

- Yes Ruddock is only one (lucky) but impressive Lewis' win.
(But it wasn't a big thing because the faded overweight Smith
and Tyson had big chance for very early ko against a better
younger Ruddock.)
For example Smith knocked down Ruddock by a much more
harder punch than Lewis but at least Ruddock had heart and could win.
Lewis beat a very bad Ruddock with a destroyed punching resistance.

- At least the 45 years old Holmes went the distance with the prime
McCall. Lewis hadn't chance for this the referee saved his life
in the second round.
The 42 years old Holmes beat a unbeaten better version Mercer
easier than the prime Lewis.
This PROVES the Tyson victim 38 years old Holmes was far better
than the 100% prime glass-chinned Lewis.
Lewis couldn't go the distance with a prime McCall and this proves
Lennox had zero chance against a prime Tyson,Holyfield,Tucker
etc.

 

I know a reason because "Waldemar" Klitschko is 6'6" .
But this is the only one reason.

 

Actually what it proves is how much better Holmes was than Tyson. Let's see what was Tyson doing at 45? or at 42?, we know at 35 he was getting his ass kicked by Lewis. That was a beatdown for the ages.

 

I don't know, maybe next fight he will be past prime.

But he has controlled the division for 8 or so years. I would consider that a rather lengthy prime.

 

Is dino still crying about Wlad? :tired I swear that somewhere in the dark corners of the internet, there is a picture of Wlad teabagging dino while giving a thumbs-up :good there's no other explanation.

 

Never past prime, but at one time he was pre-prime

 

No such thing.

 

In that prime he lost in pretty much the first round to past prime Sanders and had to run and hold on to survive against no talent Peters.

There's no case for him being any fantasy H2H victor. Real life H2H he couldn't beat Touch of Sleep Williamson.

 

8 years is a looong time, even if the HW division isn't considered to be particularly good. You can argue against his fights sometimes being boring, but you can't argue 8 years of fighting pretty much the best there is.

 

So, Joe Choynski is a better fighter than Jack Johnson.

Do you even think anything through before you type it or do you just lack any sort of logic filter?

 

Logic states that the ring genius and Hall of Famer Choynski was in fact better than Johnson since he did in fact beat him.

But a case can be made for pre-prime if you are 5-0 or in Johnson's case 4--2-1 with zero amateur experience when he met Joe.

Not the same as the 24-0 , WBC International Champ and former Gold Medalist Wlad when he lost to Purrity is it?