Wladimir Klitschko has a very good resume..where does it rate in history

Others would be offended if I didn't. It was a stab at being open-minded, which of course I have had almost no practice at for over 70 years now.

An excuse might be that I went to the eye doctor this morning and he dilated my eyes. Perhaps some of that gook leaked through my eyes and dilated my brain. I am better now.

 

1. Marciano, Jeffries, and Holmes did not lose at or near their primes.

2. Liston may not have been prime, but he was not that far past it when he lost to Ali.

 

Franklin is a partial exception. The problem is that the fights with Baer and Simon were war bond fights designed to sell war bonds and staged with the participation of the government. I don't know if Louis had any say in his opponents, who were probably selected to maximize war bond sales.

By the way, hadn't Franklin been ko'd by Pastor by the time Louis fought Simon?

 

1. The difference between Tyson and Wlad is that Smith, or perhaps Pinklon Thomas, were not his major victories. Tyson defeated the best of the previous generation, Holmes and Spinks, and did so decisively. Wlad didn't beat the best of the previous generation, Lewis (or Holyfield back when it would have meant something). His big win, off you and Suzie, is Chagaev, whose big wins over Ruiz and Valuev are matched by Haye.

2. I don't criticize Wlad for not fighting Lewis. The situation is something like when Patterson succeeded Marciano. Patterson's problem was that with Marciano retired he assumed the championship by beating a man Marciano had already beaten. Somewhat similar is Burns beating Hart. He beat a man most felt was inferior to Jeffries. Burns and Patterson probably were not top echelon champions, but both reigned under a cloud they could never escape. So it is with Wlad because of not defeating Lewis or Vitali. I can't blame him, but that's the way it is. Life is not fair.

 

I don't agree with these placings ,but their qualities are rationally argued, and objectively made,and that is all anyone can ask for,imo.
We each have our own top 10 big men and, likely no one would agree with mine.

 

Why don't you expand on that.

Then the situation becomes somewhat like Wills during the Dempsey era. Although not his fault, he suffers in historical ratings because he never got to fight the top man (if indeed he could have beaten him).

 

This isn't my top ten. This is just a listing based entirely on how severe their losses were in my estimation. As Marciano never lost at all, he comes in at #1.

 

Fair enough,Marciano just gets in my top ten,based on my unparralled intuitive insight.

 

I rate him third behind Ali and Louis.

This is entirely on historical impact. I do not factor h2h in as I consider it merely guesswork.

 

It would be guess work for you ,but me? No, the intuition comes into play here.
Guys that beat Rocky.
Dempsey
Louis
Ali
Holmes
Liston
Foreman


Maybe
Jeffries
Tunney