Well Wlad puts more on his shots than Vitali, I would even venture to say Wlad hits harder than Vitali. Vitali had lewis plenty stunned in rd 2 of their fight. it is not outside the realm of possibility that Wlad stops Lewis early. Anyhting rahman can do Wlad can do as well. I just find this outcome unlikely, however not a forgone conclusion
I'll bite, I would take Wlad by KO in 8. I think both would be very cautious because they would respect each others boxing ability and power. I see Lewis trying to be aggresive later in the fight, but Wlad is so good at judging distance that he times Lewis perfectly with a left hook and then finiishes him with a straight right. That's how I see it, but I'm pretty shitty at picking fights unless they are obvious style match-ups.
Pre-Steward Lewis takes pre-Steward Wlad in about seven With-Steward Lewis takes pre-Steward Wlad in one/two Pre-Steward Lewis takes with-Steward Wlad in eight/ten With-Steward Lewis takes with-Steward Wlad in four/five
If you are a wlad hugger, you say Wlad...If you are a Wlad hater, you say Lewis...if you are honest, you call it as being close. but XYZ guy wins
Maybe. But Wlad wouldn't come into such a situation where he could be hit with an uppercut. Vitali has a special style (his hanging left hand) that works well in 99% of fights but against an experienced top fighter like Lewis we saw Vitali in trouble. I give Wlad more chances against Lewis than Vitali had. NOT BECAUSE Wlad can eat more/harder punches (he probably can't), but because Wlad has a perfect defense AND A MUCH greater experience (basically twice as many fights against somewhat good boxers than Vitali) AND HITS HARDER than Vitali. Lewis exposed Vitali's limitations (hanging left, hittable in infights, cuts more easily, no jab). Wlad's only limitations would be his chin (and so would be Lewis'), but you have to be lightning fast like Corrie Sanders to expose it (and I doubt, that it would be enough in the current state). The same applies to Haye vs Vitali. I give Wlad against Haye better chances than Vitali has. Because Wlad is more experienced, hits harder and is faster. It most probably won't be enough for Haye to survive, but he could somehow circumvent Vitali (just like fast Chris Byrd has), but hardly circumvent Wladimir (just like Byrd couldn't).
Wlad's "perfect" defence has never been tested by somebody his own size and reach and with that kind of offensive skillset. Holding midgets like Ibragimov or Byrd or old ass Rahman at arms length and then jumping back or holding on is going to be more seriously tested against Lewis. It looks great at the moment but this is like stepping up for the final exam. And what we know about Lewis is he can take punishement from a Klitschko already. Can Wlad take some in return? Very much doubt it.
Clearly a tough match-up to call. Personally, I say let's see how the rest of Wlad's career plays out and make our decision then. These types of discussions never end up well when we are discussing one retired fighter with an entire body of work to look at... who is retired, and has a certain "legendary status" about him... and another fighter who is well on his way to creating his own legacy, but is still in his prime. Wlad hasn't finished his career yet, and fighters never get their due credit until they are retired.
I know your a Wlad fan man. But really if you were to analyse this fight how could you in favour of this Wlad?
Well put, it's easy to pick of fighters from a distance when the majority of your most reacent oppenents are either small Heavyweights or are medicore contenders like Austin, Thompson, and washed up Rahman, he should be fighting the best, which I guess is Valuev, Haye, Povetkin, and Peter, not the best list in the world, but certainly bettter competition than his most recent victims.
I think that you could easily make an intelligent argument for either fighter. I have been down this path before, and I don't wish to get into this scenario again. I don't feel the need to list over and over exactly how Wlad could beat Lewis, because I think that it's obvious how he COULD do it. Rather than do that, let's just really take a deeper look into Lewis' career. I think that if you look back on Lewis' career, the fights that he has struggled in, lost, ect... you would be silly to completely rule out a dominant Champion like Wlad in a fight against him. Unlike a lot of people, I have seen all of Lewis' career, and the man was a top notch boxer, but he had many flaws. Steward has already stated that Lewis is very uncomfortable fighting opponents bigger than himself. He had never even faced any big guy in his career with the skill set of Wlad. People like to pretend someone like Golota, or Grant represent what Wlad would in the ring, and that is just absurd. In reality, if you look at Lewis' career... it isn't all that impressive to be honest. Not that he wasn't a good fighter, but just that people take a lot of things for granted, and give him the shoulda, woulda factor on things that he never did. The man managed to not fight any of the other top 5 heavyweights of his era during his prime for one reason or another. Tyson, Holyfield, Bowe, Foreman, and Moorer were ruling the division when Lewis was supposed to be in his prime, and he didn't fight a single one of them during their prime. Lewis only became Champion after those fighters had wars with each other and were no longer at the top of their game. Then, he only truely becomes Champ after his second fight with Holyfield. His only defenses as a true Champ were against Grant (coming off of a horrible performance against Golota), Botha (who had been knocked out by Tyson the year before) and Tua... then he was knocked out by Rahman. Won his belts back in a rematch... beat an extremely over the hill Tyson, escaped the fight against Vitali and retired. That isn't exactly a dominant reign as Champion, do you think? Let alone his struggles against guys like Rahman, McCall, Mercer, Briggs, Bruno, an old Holyfield in their second fight, Vitali, Mavrovic, ect.... Lewis wasn't hardly the dominant fighter that people label him as today. Not only did he struggle in ways that Wlad never has... but he also had a very unimpressive reign as Champ. Wlad may have lost 3 fights... but in reality... if you look at his fights, round by round.. the man hardly ever even comes close to losing a round. He dominates over his opponents in such a way, that it actually has some people believing that the entire world is without boxing talent in the heavyweight division. Do you know how outrageous that claim is? I mean... we are talking about the ENTIRE WORLD... and people think that just because Wlad is on such a different level, that everyone else is horrible. He's just that good. I hasn't been since Larry Holmes that a Champion has taken out all of the top contenders, undefeated top ranked fighters, ect... the way that Wlad is doing. Uneducated fans laugh at a post like that in passing, however if you really look into it, it's the truth. Also, if you remember, Larry Holmes used to catch a lot of the same type of criticism. People don't know how to take it when the Champion dominates in that fashion... they think that means there is something wrong with everyone else.