Who's the Smallest-Ever Fighter You'd Pick to Beat Current Wlad 6+ Times Outta 10?

I pick Langford.

 

:good

 

To be able to reach Wlad's thighs?

 

To leave him spark out on the canvas.

 

this is a SILLY THREAD no 2 fighters are matched up 6 times these days maybe in the 40's or 50's

 

Likelihood of victory, in order:
1) Tyson - right style and temperament, with the physical attributes and ability to execute the precision punching to pull off the gameplan. Tyson's the only one I feel comfortable with calling the favorite.

2) Liston - hits hard enough to stop Wlad if he catches him, but has an uphill battle to climb to land his favorite punches. Significant size and speed advantage for Wlad. Liston never beat anything above a fringe contender level big men on the rare occasion he fought anyone taller than 6'2.

3) Louis - Big enough, explosive enough to create opportunities for himself, but also left himself open and got dropped in the process. He'd need to go balls out for the KO, because I don't see him being able to score enough at range to win a decision.

4)Holyfield - Has a history of fighting people his own size or slightly taller, the only problem is it's not a spectacular one. Vulnerable to the jab and too inconsistent at Heavyweight to win the majority of the time vs Wlad.

5) Marciano - there's the chance he could utilize the crouch and get inside and land something big to grind Wlad down, but he's going to have to deal with both a long jab and Klitschko's better lateral movement to do it. No history of fighting quality big men, and would be giving up 8 inches and 60 lbs. That might work on a bad big man, but not one of Wlad's level.

6) Patterson - Terrible matchup for Floyd. He didn't beat a decent fighter close to Wlad's size, and never fared well against punchers. The straight right would end it as soon as he decided to start throwing it.



Tyson's the only guy on this list who'd take him 6 or more out of 10. 2-4, I see as more or less even fights. 5-6, would be an uphill climb, literally and figuratively.

 

Just like Fred Fulton.

 

I have no doubt he has the power to KO Wlad, and the chin to survive, I'm just wondering whether the sheer size difference means he's kept at bay all night long by the jab.

 

In my opinion...Sam Langford.

 

Well, when Langford did fight a 6'6 contender-level fighter with power, a jab, a propensity to get KO'd himself, and who was also 30 lbs smaller than Wlad, he suffered perhaps the worst beating of his career and got hospitalized for it. Therefore, it seems both natural and logical to pick him to beat Wlad easily.

 

I meant to say big fighters, not necessarily just tall fighters. His record against guys over 200 pounds is something like 11-0 with all coming by KO. He's a bit like Tyson in my opinion in that he struggled more against shorter fighters, where his low crouch didn't play as much of a role.

Marciano never did face someone as tall and as good as Wlad though, and that's the big question mark about the fight. But Wlad has shown that his chin is nothing special and against someone like Marciano that would be a huge problem.

 

Boy, you classic forum guys really crack me up. Sam Langford wouldn't even make it to the tenth bout, because he would be braindead by then.
Langford is a middleweight for god's sake! Who would pick Hagler to beat Wlad? Nobody of course, but it's okay for an expert to pick Langford, because he was born in the 19th century.

 

And?

It's a hypothetical question ****-gobbler.

 

As others have said, Fulton twice dominated Langford. Wlad is bigger, stronger, very likely to be probably more skilled, and probably at least as durable. What do you make of that?

 

Now that it has been mentioned, I think Fulton and Klitschko is a very good comparison. I guess, based on what some of you guys are saying about Fulton and Klitschko, you think a prime Jack Dempsey would knock out Wladimir Klitschko in the first round? If so, that's something we would agree on. :good