I love how this frequently parroted observation is based solely on the expression on Wlad's face in the few times he's been in trouble, and not at all based on his heart and fighting spirit, never giving up and always climbing back to his feet and trying to win. The facial expression is really the sign of mental fortitude, right? Mental toughness IS heart, and no one can say Wlad lacks heart. Judging his affect is meaningless.
Ok, just going on beating greats, Holmes beat Ali (yes shot but still an ATG), Shavers and Norton. I would rank all three ahead of anyone Wladimir has faced. Tyson in turn defeated Holmes (yes old but an ATG), and Spinks (an ATG at LHW and good quality heavyweight). If Wladimir defeats Haye, then I guess you could argue he has beaten a former great-ish cruiserweight. In a way, Wlad faces a problem that Holmes faced after defeating Ali, Shavers and Norton. The level he faced after was not great but he was a skilled fighter and had a long reign. If Wlad could face his brother and beat him, then you could start talking top 15-10 but that will never happen. I reckon by retirement I would be able to place him in the top 15, but not the top ten. A big part of that will be down to the low level of competition faced (not his fault), and the defeats to fighters who are not that great whilst he was young, i.e. not shot to ****.
1) Louis 2) Ali 3) Marciano 4) Lewis 5) Johnson 6) Dempsey 7) Holmes 8) Foreman 9) Tyson 10) Frazier 11) Holyfield 12) Liston 13) Tunney 14) W. Klitschko 15) Charles 16) Walcott 17) Burns 18) Bowe 19) V. Klitschko 20) Patterson
The funny thing is you have the same fighters as I in the top ten, albeit in a different order. I think with these lists once you get beyond the top ten it gets more difficult to place the fighters. Take someone like Max Schmeling. He defeated a prime Joe Louis, was arguably the dominant Heavyweight of the 1930s, so does he deserve a place in the top 20? There are arguments for and against. For me that kind of applies to Wladimir right now, although if he beats Haye and defends a few more times I would place him comfortably within the top 15, just not top ten.
Wlad could have fought Holyfield 5 years ago if he wanted to. He stated that he didn't want to fight him. Wlad has beaten a number of HW title holders including: Byrd (x2), Peter (x2), Rahman, Ibragimov, Chagaev, Mercer, Brewster, and you can add Haye in there too. He has a record of 18-2 (15 KO's) against the Ring 's Top Ten HWs. 19 if he beats Haye. That's pretty impressive. I understand what you are saying about Holmes and I do think Wlad is along that road, but Wlad can and already has unified which should count against Larry. Wlad has the opportunity to make his status by other types of things besides fighting ATG's. 1) Rack up defenses - ala Larry Holmes 2) First HW to hold all belts at once 3) Consecutive KO streak by HW Champ 4) Hold all belts at the same time with brother 5) Signature win - David Haye That would definetly put him in my top ten...that's amazing.
Schmeling was a tough one for me. I wanted to put him in the top 20 (especially since I have Joe as my number 1). Burns is in there instead because of his title reign (12 title defenses) and Patterson is in there because of him being the youngest champ ever. Schmeling only had 1 title defense while Patterson and Burns had more defenses and more time as champs. Schmeling is 21st on my list.
IMO, first southpaw champ and 2 time champ deserves some kudos. Stop comparing Wlad to Patterson and Moorer. Maybe I am weird for having Moorer in my top 15, but MANY observers have Patterson in their top 10-15. So w/e.
If Wlad unified all 4 major belts and can do something like 15-16 consecutive title defenses, that may be enough for me to put him in the top 10-12. If he made it to 20 that be huge. 20 defenses these days is like 30 back in the day. 20 be a bit hard, I think he can hit 15 easy.
This will also be one of the points that holds Wlad back. His signature win wiould be no more than a footnote on most other ATG HW's records. Top 15 is fine with me, top 10 at a push. I guess it depends on the combination of longevity, standard of opponent and manner of win.
I couldn't agree more! Vlad has not planed off from improving his boxing skills either. He became a better fighter from the losses he suffered and I am sure he will be a man on a misson when he fights Haye.
I must strongly agree. Before Manny turned Wlad into the brilliant-but-boring fighter his is today, Wlad was quite aggressive & showed many moments of kinetic brilliance. Had he developed in a less "safety first" manner, well .. he still wouldn't have had suitable competition, but he would have a better rep. (esp with us shallow Americans!)
he says Wlad beats haye and I think brits should pay attention to what the best boxing writer says and stop dreaming.
Hang on, there's tons of stuff here you're giving him credit for that is just not credit worthy! He didn't fight Holyfield. Thats a minus, not a plus. The names you mention on his record are just B level fighters. Byrd and Rahman aren't bad but they were past their best. And no, you can't count Haye in there. They haven't even fought yet. His sheer amount of defenses is an achievement but when they're against sub-par fighters, it's not so impressive. Holding all the belts with your brother is not a good thing. Who else has ever got credit for sharing belts with another fighter? And Haye is not a particularly good signature win.