Just wondering, where would you guys rate Wlad if his three losses never occurred, or if they were boring UD wins?
Higher of course. What did you think ? Where would you rate Joe Louis if his losses didn't occur ? where would you rate Ezzard Charles if he beat Marciano ? where would you rate George Foreman if he had the privilege of fighting at MSG / London / Montreal during a winter's night in a ring supervised by some neutral commission ?
I would rate Joe Louis in about the same spot. If Ezzard beat Marciano, he definitely goes up pound for pound, but only a little bit highter at heavyweight (Marciano would drop quite a bit). In relation to Wlad, would you rate him at number 1 of all time? I am thinking that without the three losses, he would definitely be in the elite and in the top 10 maybe 5.
#1 of all time IDK , maybe. His wins over McCline , Byrd , Austin , Barrett and a few more are telling but Vitali might still had a case. So you have Louis @ #1 ? how can you excuse his loss to Schmelling ? and his loss to Walcott ? and the fact that in Walcott #2 , he hit Walcott while he was down ? and hitting Buddy Baer after the bell . And his overall opposition was not any more formidable than Wladimir's . McCline would have wiped the floor with all of Louis' opponents . Maybe even Ray Austin too. If Monte Barrett simply fought in those days then he would have been remembered / regarded as a top contender "whom would have been a champion if he only fought at a different era except of his and except of the 1970s" :yep. Louis' opposition , in h2h terms was mostly lousy but extremely overrated. Max Baer might have been a tough CW contender / brief belt holder , nothing more if he fought today , Schmelling was not even tough , people ignore his shameful losses , just like you do Fitzsimmons' , Choynski's , etc.
I have Louis at number 2 and would do so regardless of whether he beat Schmelling or not, or even Charles or Marciano. (Well okay, i might start thinking about it).
Honestly I can't say. If history plays out as it has but them losses are removed it makes no difference to me. His legacy is mainly based on his dominance since the retirement of lewis. And all the unavenged losses happened before then. So i'd still have him top 15 if he retired today. However if history changes slightly, i.e. 1) It is widely accepted than lewis ducked wlad throughout his title rein 2) wlad and vitali are considered equal until vitali retires 3) wlad v byrd is recognised for the ring title Then yeah i'd say top 5 minimum. Because then he's an avoided challenger who became the best when he first got an opportunity. Instead of being a mediocre challenger who became the best when he first got an opportunity.
He still has the loss to Jersey Joe Walcott, which hurts him quite a lot, imo. If Rocky doesnt beat Charles, i doubt many would see him in the same light as they do at the moment. Charles is a good fighter, and he performed very well against Marciano, despite the losses. I dont think he gains all that much from reversing the tables, because he almost did anyway and he doesnt lose much from his performances.
