41 year old Wlad in a series of fantasy fights

Ramos and Ziggy

 

Wilder gonna beat him, watch.

 

Hey, Wlad isn't the oldest in the group, not by a long chalk because Charlie Sonny Liston was really 72 years old when he won the title...

 

Ah yeah, my bad fam.

 

Wlad's performances depend on his mindset, which depends on who he fights and what they bring the table.

I don't believe that Wlad would have fought all of those guys in the same manner that he fought Joshua.

If you'd have asked this same question after he'd fought Pulev, Jennings and Tyson, the answers would have been very different.

 

This is just silly.

Why is it likely that he'd have knocked everyone out?

You think it's likely that he'd have knocked out the best version of Ali? On what grounds? That he gave you an exciting fight at Wembley?

Ali would have done a complete psyche job on Wlad. In a realistic hypothetical fight, he'd more than likely have been ultra cautious against Ali. And realistically, he wouldn't have fought all of those guys in the mindset that he fought Joshua.

You guys are really getting carried away now.

At 39 he looked awful against Jennings and he couldn't beat Fury. Yet at 41, you're saying it's likely he'd have knocked out peak versions of Ali and Liston?

It's a fantasy.

 

Well then come back to us when you've calmed down.

He's given us all an exciting fight and the forum's gone mad.

It was a great fight, based on a great clash of styles, and Wlad's mindset.

Now if this 41 year old version of Wlad is so great that you think he'd have knocked out peak versions of Ali and Liston etc, then please tell us why he couldn't beat Tyson and why he looked poor against Jennings when he was younger?

Wlad is a great fighter. But he's naturally cautious, he was iced by 3 non great fighters in his 20's, he struggled with Peter in his 30's, he couldn't cope with Tyson Fury at almost 40, yet he'd be favoured to beat Ali and Liston etc, based on an exciting fight against Joshua? It's laughable.

 

Based on what?

History has proven that he couldn't beat fighters who weren't as good as some of the guys on that list.

 

^^

Finally some voice of reason

 

Where does this line of thinking come from?

So other than Ali, the others wouldn't have had a chance?

Based on what?

He was knocked out by 3 non great fighters in his 20's.

He struggled with Peter.

He had no answer against Fury.

At 41, he is not suddenly better than he's ever been before.

 

He might be able to grab and lean his way to wins over Marciano and Frazier. He probably would beat Johnson at basically his game. Dempsey, if the talent drop-off is dramatic enough for guys that long ago, is not a sure thing.

 

The forum's gone mental.

He played his part in giving us a great fight at Wembley. And I congratulate him for that. But now he's all of a sudden this revitalised fighter who'd have been favoured over a peak Ali etc?

Ha!

This is a guy who 12 months ago, said:

"I don't know why I couldn't change tactics mid-fight against Tyson Fury"

I think these guys are so used to seeing him in lacklustre fights, they've now got completely carried away and are overrating his abilities.

If at 41 he'd be favoured to take out the likes of Ali and Liston, then what the hell happened when he fought Fury and Jennings at 39?

 

Nobody is talking about Joshua.

You're obsessed.

 

So you don't think he'd have had even a chance to have beaten Foreman, yet you think he'd have been favoured to have beaten Ali, Louis and Liston by knockout? I more than anyone appreciate that styles make fights, but those predictions are ridiculous.

 

WK is done, stick a fork in him , lol, he was done several years ago, the Jennings fight was a joke against a opponent who was a part time fighter learning the craft as a adult and he could not pull the trigger against Fury.

People seem to forget that the Fury fight sucked balls and both fighter threw like 5 punches a round.......easily one of the shi**iest fights in recent memory similar to the Lewis/Tua snooze fest.