Is Wladimir Klitschko a favorite over prime George Foreman and Sonny Liston H2H

This is one of the strangest videos I've ever seen. Even by 80s standards.
And that sword fight at minute 2:07

 

It was a solid hit too hahaha. Reached 12 in Australia and was very popular for a time. The 80's sure had some quirky clips

 

Odd response, considering that you completely skipped over the point I made about Wlad's career in order to write about grammar. BTW you repeated the same mistake--you use commas instead of periods and semicolons.

 

A teacher as well as a doc, got it

Troll elsewhere.

 

There's no double standard and how would you even know if there was , you're on the forum less than a year.

You are right in saying that Wlad isn't the only guy in history to rely on fouls though , but his clinch is more comparable to guys who lost.
For example Fergusson when he got DQ'd against Tyson and Henry getting DQ'd against Lewis.

They excessively clinched to the point neither guy was able to box. Thats the type of clinching Wlad used all throughout his career.

You only have to look at Bruno vs Tyson II to know how quickly Wlads illegal clinching would be shut down by the ref if he was in that era.

Another good comparison is when Broner fought Shaun Porter. He couldn't handle Porters aggression and repeatedly cliched to stifle Porters work in close. Difference is Bonder didn't have the ref on his side and was warned and point deducted , which allowed Porter work in close and win
Wlad performed just like Broner against Povetkin. Thats why im critical of Wlad , his best victory was a result of that performance.
https://s02.yapfiles.com/files/708906/Wladimir_Klitschko_vs_Alexander_Povetkin_3.gif

 

Here are their undefeated streaks in order:

• Joe Louis — 13 years

• Bernard Hopkins — 12 years

• Wladimir Klitschko — 11 years

• Benny Leonard — 8 years

• Henry Armstrong — 4 years

• Archie Moore — 4 years

• Jersey Joe Walcott — 2 years

Something about context, right?

 

In the second half of the fight it was often Povetkin initiating the clinches.

 

If you are arguing that then fine. I was only trying to say a lot of fighters did stuff and got away it as well (as you point out some didn't get away with it) and at least from what I have seen on here sometimes it goes a miss even though admittedly haven't been here too long.

I get why people would criticise the holding but that's the only point I was trying to make. I also think the Povetkin fight shouldn't have looked like that.

 

The problem is when make people make a big deal about Wlad's clinching while ignoring anytime any other fighter uses the clinch as much as or even more then Wlad, especially old school fighters he spent more time in the clinch then actually fighting at range.......

 

Classic.

 

That's fine. I understood you perfectly.

However, let me reiterate - Throughout history, boxers have been penalized, lost points, and DQ'd as a result of breaking the rules. This has changed the shape of bouts and their results. In this sense, there can be no discernible double-standard.

If you're referring to a double-standard arising from the perspective of fans, then you'd need to provide evidence of that because I don't see it as such. More that fans have differing opinions on almost everything across the spectrum of boxing's subtopics.

That said, it would seem that you and I agree in principle on the Wlad/Povetkin bout and I suspect that this is in large part because the level of 'fouling' in this case is extraordinary. While no two cases are ever the same, each being judged on its own context and merits, certain bouts are just simply outside of that grey area of doubt, and are just clear-cut extreme examples.

For mine, I can quite confidently state that Wlad/Povetkin is the worst performance from an apparent heavyweight champ I have ever witnessed.

 

Hagler and Monzon are better examples of guys whose early losses are totally ignored in the context of H2H discussions. There is an assumption that they improved making them irrelevant

 

Nah they suck, you couldn't have picked worse examples. Monzon had an 100 fight career, and his only 3 losses came in his first 20 fights. His several draws were a result of the Argentinian scoring system.

Hagler only ever properly lost to Monroe early in his career, the Watts fight was a roberry and the Seales draw had 8 even rounds.

That is not the same as gold medalist Wlad being KO'd by 3 unranked men in fights 25, 42 and 45.

 

The judges gave it to Watts. And all those draws are a very bad look. What does his gold medal have to do with anything?