Wlad klitschko better than Ali!!!!!!

So just out of curiosity, a question to you: Do you beleive sports can be accurately predicted by stats and numbers? Is it just boxing, or is it all sports that possess no intangibles whatsoever?

Can an athlete's greatness be measured by simple stats?

If your answer is yes, then theoretically you should be able take any sport, even one you have no clue about and have never seen, and make predictions on said sport based on looking at a few stats.

Would you feel comfortable ranking hockey players greatness, as compared to other hockey players, merely by compiling stats? How about Rugby? Aussie-league football?

 

:rofl

 

I am waiting.
Unless you come up with some ridiculous stat like "The number of lost non-title fights against southpaws" you have no chance.

That's exactly the problem: You have a clear fact that Klitschko's last 10 opponents are better (at the first glance at least) than Ali's, but obviously it's too unbelievable to simply accept it.

 

Sport predicted? What the heck? I am comparing achievements. I am not making future predictions.

I have no clue about hockey. I would never claim to be able to calculate anything.

But if you want to calculate achievements (and not some subjective greatness) of course you can calculate a toplist with any sports.

A well calculated toplist would indeed tell you 90%-95% of the correct achievement.

 

Why are you waiting? I think I made it quite clear that I have no intention of doing it.
If you hadn't noticed, I'm ridiculing you. If you want to be taken seriously by anybody with that kind of argument then you should go and use it on a golf forum.
for the record, I'm scratching my head to think of anybody Wlad EVER fought who was as good as Berbick, let alone Holmes.

 

But you are suggesting that "subjective greatness" is a useless concept. Thus, making the claim that comparing KO percentages gives validation to the statement that Klitchko is greater than Ali. I am suggesting that "subjective greatness" is better described as "intangibles", which is in fact very, very important in the world of sport. Do you disagree?


I'm glad you don't know about hockey, that was the point. I should explain that being Canadian, I have followed hockey my whole life and know alot about it. Tell you what, why don't I send you a list of ten players, you look at their stats and give me a ranking order of who is a better overall player. I guarantee your list will be innaccurate at best, and at worst, laughable.

 

No, you made it clear that YOU COULD come up with a stat proving that Westphal is great. It's interesting to hear that you gave up.

Ali LOST against Berbick.
Ali LOST against Holmes.

Unbelievable. And what's more unbelievable that you are not the first who brings up ALI's LOSSES as a proof that Ali was greater than Klitschko.

Exactly what I am saying: I am arguing not against Ali, but against a mythical Ali who won every time.

 

They both are and need to have their feet set for almost three seconds to throw a punch. You think Sonny looked bad? They would look even more helpless.

 

An old Ali lost against Berbick.
An old Ali lost against Holmes.

Fixed it for you.

 

NOPE ITS NOT BROKE..STUPID ASSES LIKE YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND IF YOU DONT TYPE IN CAPS!:bbb

 

No, it's an OK concept for a SUBJECTIVE toplist. It may also be a good concept for a p4p toplist.

I am comparing WHOLE CAREER achievements (except in this thread that I didn't start) and these are pretty well expressed by KOratios and world titles won etc.

Usually when people compare fighters they don't really compare the fighters' records but the fighters PERFORMANCES in their PRIME (= subjectively perceived performances in a few fights). I am comparing whole career records. And believe me there is hardly anyone better than Klitschko, Ali, Lennox, Foreman, Tyson etc. Klitschko definitely plays at the top.

Now having a better record doesn't mean that A would beat B. For such an analysis you would need the see how well A fought against fighters LIKE B, but this is already a far greater speculation than to simply compare records. For example it's pretty safe to assume that featherfist Ali could not KO granite chin Vitali Klitschko. Moreover Ali bodywise would be Klitschko's completely average/below average opponent. Ali on the other hand has not seen anything remotely heavy and tall as Vitali. It's pretty safe to assume that Vitali would win. But does that change Ali's achievements? No! Ali would still have achieved more than Vitali.

As I said I compare achievements not intangibles. But I believe that "intangibles" WILL INDEED manifest themselves as KOratio or world titles.

Yeah, possible. Since I don't even know what would be an important stat and what not. But I know exactly that KOratio _IS_ a defining stat at heavyweight boxing.

 

The very first thing I said, was that you are someone who can't be argued with and that I wasn't going to be involved in said argument. The wastphal comment, was made to show up how utterly stupid your x had so many fights y had so many fights so x is better than y because he scored more z's approach is. Do you understand? I never had any intention of actually doing it. It's called irony.

So what if he lost? you said wlad's last ten opponents were better than Ali's, I'm saying they're not.
I can't believe I've been dragged into this, especially since I half believe you're taking the ****....at least I hope so.