Klitschko has only defended the HW title TWICE....

Braddock was a bum with a 45 and 23 record who like many of Joe's wins wasn't even a cruiserweight let alone a heavyweight by modern standards.

 

bums don't win the hw title.

he lost a lot because for a long while he was fighting close to starvation during the depression with untreated injuries.

 

And Ring Magazine and the Cyber Boxing Zone for starters.

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/achamp.htm

 

Sure they do. Corrie Sanders is a bum.

He was starving so much he didn't even weigh 200 pounds on fight night.

 

Oh right, the lineal title is the only one that matters. :roll:

 

Oh that is rich associating me with ANYTHING "planet Klitschko"! Lmao!! Right is right and you're wrong my man!

 

The funny thing is that if you apply the logic being used to discredit Klitschko, then Joe Louis never beats the lineal champion either.

Take a look at the lineage which begins with Schmelling, a lineage that Louis eventually takes over.

 

Defences aren't counted in "lineal defences" outside this thread. It's just a troll angle that worked out pretty well.

I haven't even bothered to figure out where the lineal part of things comes in to play during the Klitschko era. They end up beating anyone anyway, so ...

 

Joe Louis didn't have a tag team partner that was #1 and #2 in the division on different occasions .
He didn't have a partner who avenged his losses either.

 

Why will it automatically make him the greatest ever?

We've discussed this before.

There's many, many factors to consider when rating a fighter.

Wlad's a great fighter, but he's not going to be regarded as the greatest HW of all time, just based on his statistics.

Statistics don't allow for circumstances.

 

Well, as long as anyone who challenges the brothers reign gest smashed to pieces, it's a Klitschko win.

 

Comments like this are the reason why the opinions of Klitschko fanboi's mean less than nothing.

:happy