Wladimir Klitschkos Legacy

No , that logic only applies to a winning performance , not a losing one. Whose place in history ever went up from a losing performance ?

 

If he was made fight clean and foul free against Povetkin he would have lost. I have big respect for his performance but ultimately it ended up getting him ktfo.

 

If you discount Wlad for the Joshua fight then you are going to have to penalize:

Johnson for getting sparked by Willard
Dempsey for losing to Tunney
Louis for getting knocked out of the ring by Marciano
Liston for losing to Ali
Ali for losing to Holmes
Holmes for getting KOed by Tyson
Tyson for losing to Lennox Lewis

none of these guys were 40 with Liston likely being the closest because of the debate about his age. There is a reason George Foreman is the only Heavyeight to successfully win a title fight past 40. I think the number of Heavyweights that have made a successful defense past 38 is just Charles, Wlad, Vitali, and Foreman.

 

There was definitely but there was just something about the era that seemed a bit of a downer. Perhaps it's because I loved the 90 s and was always comparing to then. But suppose to be honest every eras got its share of crap fighters and fights. I've respect for the klitschko s but I'm glad it looks like there time is over.

 

Greatness being added to by a 'quality' loss is not out of the question but it's still a loss, nonetheless.

For Wlad's stock to rise on the back of his loss to Joshua, there is a reliance on yet more layers of speculation; influenced by both how much better Joshua gets, from this point on and the "What if Wlad had been younger..?" question.

 

I don't know, I found the 90s to be frustrating overall. The belts being fragmented created some interesting chaos though and there was plenty of televised showcases.

What I will miss was Wlad's ability to mostly get the fights made once he had the belts and was calling the shots. I never expected him to fight his brother, but beyond dragging Valuev in the ring, Wlad got all the major threats in the ring with him eventually. Wlad didn't leave us with many "If's"

 

Brewster and Sanders beat a pre-prime Wladimir Klitschko , he was in his prime from 2008-2014 and Tyson Fury
is his Ken Norton , every great fighter has an opponent who is a nightmare for him stylewise.
Anthony Joshua is a beast , tell me one fighter in the heavyweight history who could have competed with him
at 41 years old like Wladimir did.

 

As in Ezzard Charles? He lost the title at like 30.

 

There was definitely but there was just something about the era that seemed a bit of a downer. Perhaps it's because I loved the 90 s and was always comparing to then. But suppose to be honest every eras got its share of crap fighters and fights. I've respect for the klitschko s but I'm glad it looks like there time is over.

Putting it like that pal , makes good sense.

 

How come Sanders and Brewsters don't get primes?

Sanders was way past prime and Brewster had already lost twice to bums so he was past prime too.

Wlad is the only guy to have about 10 different primes.

 

See that's my thought process. Joshua may not even end up being that great, I don't know, but he has some incredible tangibles that make it difficult for an older guy to beat him. He has size, two handed power, durability, and speed. This isn't a Mercer or Moorer you could cruise against or catch with one big punch.

I think he would outpoint Foreman and Holmes just because they would have shelled up, Wlad was making a serious effort to win and never stopped looking for the knockout.

Vitali retired at 40, right, and was looking pretty rough in the Charr fight.

 

Every great fighter lost fights and Wlad had only one prime and that was clearly from 2008 until his fight with
Pulev in 2014.

 

If you're going to say you can't think of many heavyweights who would have beaten Wlad then you have consider his current ledger.

Fair enough, if you want to peddle the idea that Wlad wasn't in his prime in his late 20's with over 40 bouts and 6 title fights under his belt, but it doesn't help an argument for there not being many heavyweights of the past who could have beaten him.

Also - I tend to rate All Time Greatness on legacy; not speculative Head-to-Heads; the latter being entirely subjective with no basis in reality; more a reliance on attributes one observer might feel are more important than another.

 

You're either prime or you're shot. Wlad never entered the ring a shot fighter.

 

I am thinking top ten when the dust settles.

The raw numbers are pretty hard to argue with.

Of course it will be a few years before the final picture is clear with all of his opponents, as was the case with Lewis and Calzaghe.