Greater fighter: Thomas Hearns or Wladimir Klitschko

He got wobbled or knocked down plenty by old or slow men like Thompson and Peter.
Haye is about the best of that bunch and he’s losing to all of the historically important heavyweights.
I don’t care if some posters want to call him ‘the closest thing to Ali that Wlad faced’, Haye was a relative bum.

 

Jeff Lacy was destined for greatness until he ran into Joe Calzaghe.

 

Obviously you’re just having some fun here.

Tyson did a complete psyche job on him. Both inside and outside of the ring.

There’s nothing to suggest that he’d have beaten Tyson, even 5 years earlier.

There’s nothing to suggest that he’d have could have ruled the 70’s, 80’s or 90’s.

And again, he wouldn’t have had all that dominance and being considered ‘The Man’ had Vitali have still been active.

Also, even if the K’s hadn’t have existed, the HW division would still have been full of mostly B and C level guys.

 

Without Wlad guys like Haye and Povetkin could have been lineal champs. That would have massively helped their legacies.

Pure speculation that he couldn't beat Tyson earlier or do well in the 90s

 

Without Wlad , Hayes best win is still an aging Valeuv at the end of his career. Without Wlad , Haye is still knocked out twice by Toney Bellew.
Without Wlad , Povetkin basically has the exact same resume he does now minus the Wlad loss.

 

Seriously though it's a shame we didn't ever see the rematch.

 

It's unfair to compare heavyweights with other fighters who have the ability to go through the weight divisions; there's a broader scope for greatness, and usually better names they can face, especially in the case of Hearns. You only have to look at both of their resumes. Wlad fought every single HW of his era, but the vast majority were B-grade at best and would have likely been annihilated by other ATGs.

I say this as someone who isn't that big of a fan of Wlad and think he is overrated by many on here. Hearns knocking out Duran and Cuevas in 2 rounds, and beating Benitez over 15 rounds are three wins that set him ahead of Wlad, plus he wasn't stopped multiple times by fringe contenders, Hearns only lost to the best of the best, especially in his prime.

 

Sam Peter was 25 yrs old and the terror of the division and undefeated the first time he met and lost to Wlad.

Tony Thomson was one year older and once beaten when he first met Wlad.

What about undefeated Povetkin, undefeated Pulev, undefeated Chagaev, undefeated Ibragimov, once beaten Byrd, undefeated Brock, etc?

GOAT

 

Povetkin becomes champ without Wlad. Whose going to stop him?

 

I don't really subscribe to the without or in another era arguments for the most part that have been used over recent pages here.

I am talking both those both for and against Wlad as well as his opponents not just one or the other.

 

Big, big difference between Lacy and Wlad. Lacy only had 4 title defenses and never unified. He is the equivalent of Chris Byrd.

Wlad is much closer to Calzaghe than Lacy.

 

I mean if your going by length of reign or title defenses then CHRIS JOHN is one of the greatest featherweights ever.
Or Ottke is top 3 super middleweights ever.

 

Wlad was arguably the best during his title reign. Other guys with long reigns generally can't make that claim

 

It matters who you fight and who you beat and how you beat them. Its that simple.

 

Chris John never unified. Ottke never fought outside of Germany and only unified 1 time in having the belt for 6 years. He didn't even fight his main rival. Wlad fought everybody (reasonable).