Wlads h2h rank drops

Whether his 2h ranking drops largely depends on where you ranked him before the fight. If you thought he was the best ever, and I know a few that do, it's going to be hard to justify that on an ongoing basis. That said, losing at 39, is in my opinion basically meaningless. H2H I do see him easily top 10 and perhaps top 5, regardless of this loss.

But in terms of over all career achievements it might underscore the quality of his comp, but as a few of said, that will also depend on how dominate Fury is.

 

I still see this as his Spinks moment, although Fury is much better than Leon Spinks was.

 

I agree. I can only imagine this sight after a Spinks victory. We already have a post with posters choosing Fury to beat or KO Ali.

 

The question you have to ask is did Wlad beat anyone better than Fury during his 9 year title reign?

Most people think of Wlad as having two careers - the early one when he was more exciting to watch but got stopped 3 times and the second one where he kept winning with a robotic style that relied on his physical advantages, his jab and keeping his distance from any meaningful exchanges. Any time he was hit he would tie up his opponent.

If Fury could have beaten Wlad now as comfortably as he did by fighting in a way that Wlad couldn't deal with then I see no reason why Wlad 5 years ago would have beaten Fury. Wlad had a long reign and kept winning so that has to be admired - but his opposition were lacking skill or an effective gameplan to take Wlad out of his comfort zone.

I know Joe Louis had the bum of the month club so some may scoff at his reign but Wlad has Alexander Povetkin and David Haye on his resume as good wins but those two were always at a disadvantage due to the difference in size.

 

All great champions of the past era were larger than the rest of their opponents. Also if size matters, then Wladimir Klitschko could surely destroy Joe Louis and Ali with ease....right?

 

Wlad can deal with hand speed when he can control the distance of the fight. Fury took that from him. Prime Wlad would still have a chance of beating Holmes by using his size.

 

Anyone who thinks Fury can fight a lick needs to at the very least read a book concerning how to box. As big a joke as I have ever seen in the 45 years I have been following the sport and its history. I watched this bout laughing out loud at what I was seeing.

 

I'm sure all of your primative 180-lb favorites from the early 1900s would have cleaned Tyson Fury's clock!

 

Like Ali's h2h dropped after Berbick :deal

 

Once again not the same. Ali was not champ and ranked p4p when he fought berbick

 

Just like there's no reason to think 1974 Ali who won vs. Foreman would have won vs Berbick right? Sound logic

 

Right. context is important, but that should go without saying.

Age is not inconsequential for Wladimir in this loss, but this comparison is disingenuous.

 

We won't know how much age is a factor until we see again. Hopkins, Foreman, Holmes, and Archie moore were all good at advanced age. And I'd argue they all took more punishment than wlad. But that's my opinion I guess

 

Agreed with everything here. Spot on, I reckon.

 

Did Hopkins h2h rank drop with his loss to Kovalev? I mean how stupid are you clowns?