Wladamir Klitschko STILL hasn't fought anyone better than SANDERS

GET THE **** BACK UNDER THE BRIDGE. SHUT THE **** UP.

60-3

14 title defenses and counting. Counting for a while

Haye, Ibragimov, Byrd, Chagaev, all every bit as good as Sanders. Especially Byrd and Ibragimov. And he schooled them.

But I like it :good Let the hate flooowwww through you.

 

if you think a fat Sanders is better than Byrd or Ibragimov, YDKSAB

 

Ironic, coming from a Deontay Windmiller cheerleader :rofl GTFO.

 

I think Sanders had a hell of a lot of natural talent and potential for the sport but he didn't have the ambition or drive to make the most of it. I would pick Byrd, Haye and Chagaev to beat Sanders every time, while I'd put Rahman, Peter, Ibgrabrimov, Thompson and Brewster in the camp of fighters who could beat him but equally could be beaten by him.

Sanders - despite his resume being rather poor - is certainly one of the better fighters Wlad has fought but he's not the best.

 

This is ****ing ******ed.

 

****

 

These are the only fighters available in Wlad's era. He can either duck them, lose to them, or knock them all out brutally.

Of those three I think he has chosen the best option.

 

****ing Klitschko haters ! ! !

 

Seeing the Big 6-0 next to Wlad's record has really struck a nerve.

 

They aren't bums now, the HW division is poor. But Wlad used to be, in the past. Vitali was pretty good boxer, but don't forget he tested positive (steroids), so he might have been helped.

 

If Paulie Malignaggi would fight only "senchenkos", he would be the king of the world. atsch :rofl Though I like Paulie as a person!

 

He's probably the most dangerous, but not the most skilled, nor would he have been Wlad's biggest win had he won. Sanders is like Briggs or Bonecrusher or Shavers, or any big, but wildly inconsistent puncher. Beatable on paper, but if he catches you you're in trouble. Sanders happened to catch Wlad.

 

David Haye, Ruslan Chagaev, and Eddie Chambers are all better than Sanders.