Biggest "forums darlings"

The thing is fighting ecomically and using clinches which the ref's allow most the time by there choice is better than taking lots flush shots from big heavyweights in particular when you have the tools to avoid it.

But true fighters with styles that people find more exciting tend to show up higher on all time lists.

 

It's not just about whether Wladmir is exciting or not (a subjective metric), it's also the fact constantly clinching, leaning, and grappling is actually against the rules and the ref was supposed to penalize him for doing this excessively. I think he was only ever deducted points in maybe 2 fights. The most significant factor being that his long reign with many defenses (the main leverage he has for being an ATG in the first place) also coincided with the time frame during which he most enjoyed abusing his jab and grab privileges.

Of course if a fighter plays to their strengths, that is smart. It is also smart to avoid punishment and not just grit your teeth swinging away, you want to be able to actually enjoy your money when you retire. And if a ref doesn't do their job enforcing the rules, that's the ref's fault, not the fighters. But with all that being said, it's a valid criticism against Wladmir. Especially for matches such as Povektin where we could've gotten a drastically different match if points were deducted for excessive clinching.

 

While that's fair enough throughout history lots of great fighters have abused the fact ref's don't do more we see this with Holyfield's headbutting to Andre Ward's low blows. The earliest years of boxing leading up several decades after were in many fights almost solely clinch fights like nearly the whole fight.

It's completely ok to penalize Wlad and people understandably do for this as long as people are consistent a bit.

 

And that's the main problem and what I always point out. People never apply the same consistent standards to all fighters only the ones they don't like while the ones they do get a pass.

 

Everyone talking about Foreman and Wlad as if John L. GOATllivan doesn't outrank both

 

Okay but no one is picking on just Wladmir. There have been dozens upon dozens of threads criticizing Holmes for thumbing, Holyfield for headbutts/PEDs, or Ward for his low blows and rough tactics (Ward in particular was the scourge of the general forum for about 2 years straight after the Kovalev fights to the point you'd think he was the Antichrist). Plenty of people have in fact used these issues to lower the above fighters' ATG rankings.

 

Galento was an underrated skilled fighter

 

For sure I was saying it a reasonable position as long as there is consistency I wasn't trying to say everyone is inconsistent even if some people are.

 

Unfortunately, Wlad's clinching can be viewed as bordering on a 'strategic imperative', which is why he takes a bigger hit than most from some - and rightfully so, in my opinion.

The Povetkin bout was rank - when it should have served to platform Wlad's magnum opus.

Levels of performance matter.

 

I'd point you toward the general forum but i think that place has passed you by, son.

 

Laila Ali retired undefeated and I like her chances against some of the boys in this thread

 

Not consistently (dino......) That's my real issue

 

You apparently live on another planet. Frazier almost beat Jerry to death 9 months prior to the Norton fight.

 

Uh, yeah, Holmes and Holyfield catch hell around here.

Dino is a well known K brother hater.

 

Was Frazier shot after Foreman orbited him ? Maybe someone like you would think that. Was Holyfield shot after his 3rd war with Bowe and getting hit hundreds or times and brutally ko'd by a much bigger man ? Past prime ≠ shot, Its nothing but parroting. If he were so shot he wouldn't have performed so well against Norton, unless you're willing to admit Norton is just a bum.

Muhammad Ali got beat by a bum who could barely handle a tiny shot to bits Quarry. That's what it boils down to