Wladimir Klitschkos Legacy

How did I do that exactly? These men were called tomato cans, I pointed out their accomplishments, something tomato cans do no not have.

If you want to break this out into time line relevant to Wlad:

Byrd W Vitali 2000
Wlad W Byrd 2000
Rahman W Lewis 2001
McCline W Grant 2001
Byrd W Tua 2001
McCline W Briggs 2002
Wlad W McCline 2002
Byrd W Holyfield 2002
Brewster W Wlad 2005
Brewster W Golota 2005
Wlad W Byrd 2005
Wlad W Brewster 2007
Wlad W Rahman 2008

Rahman's win over Lewis is the only one that was far removed from Wlad's timeline. Though I stress I was defending these men as fighters with no regards to how they place on Wlad's resume, because "tomato can" is a pretty hefty insult for men that gave a ton and achieved in this sport we all supposed to love.

I would disagree but given you are using some vague careful language there, the degree to which I disagree is uncertain.

I would argue Byrd and Povetkin as "marquee wins" but I won't argue them as all time great heavyweights if that's what you would expect me to do to defend that stance. I rate both these men over or on the level of Vitali Klitschko and he's considered to be a "marquee win" for Lennox Lewis.

 

I've already explained how you did it.
Nice names look good on paper. You didn't initially use Rahman's name, did you? No, instead you referred to a win over Lewis, as a clue. Much shinier.

I'm not saying they were 'cans' but I'm not, for example, bigging up McCline's win over Grant, either.

You can call that pro win an achievement, if you like. I call Michael Grant's broken ankle an accident.

I'm neither using vague nor careful language. There was nothing special on Wlad's resume and no marquee wins. I couldn't be more plain about my view.

You can argue against that if you like.
My own opinion is that Byrd is one of the most overrated Heavyweights in recent years and nowhere near elite.
And, as for Wlad/Povetkin... to refer to that dog's dinner of a bout, as a marquee win is a travesty, all on its own.

 

Not interesting. Merely classic Dino, who is quick to adopt whatever will serve his anti-Klitschko agenda the best. Presenting diametrically opposite arguments are par for the course for this special individual.

 

By analyzing numbers, he is definitely a top10 HW. Toe-to-toe, he is usually well regarded and arguably top10. To me, he is #6 or #7 ATG at HW. However, he beat a bunch of good fighters: Byrd x2, Haye, Chagaev, Povetkin, Pulev, Peter.

Longevity: He has been a usual member of Top5 rankings from 2000 until 2017. 17 years is a lot of time at the top. Similar to Ali (1962-1979), Louis (1934-1951). Longer than Dempsey (11 years), Marciano (6 years), Liston (7 years), Frazier (10 years), Tyson (16 years), Lewis (12 years), Holmes (8 years; afterwards he only fought once between 86 and 91). It could be argued that Holyfield and Foreman had longer careers at the top. However, in Holyfield's case, he was already washed-up after 16 years and, in Foreman's case, the career is divided in two different decades divided by most part of the late 70s and 80s.

Title reign: The second longest reign at HW. And third in number of title defenses. Remember that Louis' reign has a 4 year hiatus. Wlad's reign is longer than Marciano's career and almost as long as Frazier's career. Besides, don't forget that he has 30 fights more than Frazier and 20 fights more than Marciano & Lewis. A longer career = more chances of losing.

Unbeaten streak and consistency: Wlad's unbeaten streak started in late 2004 and finished in late 2015: 11 years. Only Louis and Holmes had longer unbeaten streaks (12.5 years). Wlad's unbeaten streak is longer than Marciano's and Frazier's career. Another important detail is that Wlad was very dominant during his fights, barely losing any rounds during his title reign and actually during his career. His career is much more consistant than Holyfield's or Tyson's, for instance.

CONS:
1. He is apparently fragile. The loses against Sanders and Brewster damage his career. He was close to his physical prime and shouldn't have lost.
2. He doesn't have a notable win past his best. Holmes has Mercer. Foreman has Moorer.

My Top10:

1. Ali
2. Louis
3-4. Lewis
3-4. Holmes
5. Foreman
6-7. Klitschko
6-7. Frazier
8. Holyfield
9. Tyson
10. Liston

 

Well if you can't follow the conversation you might want to keep your cute comments to yourself. Or not, nobody can stop you from being foolish. It's your right.

But if you want to get anything else out of me on the matter, I suggest you actually follow my post trail that led to the post you had a problem with and understand the context, it's not terribly complicated or hard to do. Do you have issues navigating on this site?

I brought up the Grant and Briggs wins in retort to the claim that McCline was a tomato can. II didn't "BIG EM UP" in any capacity other than as evidence that McCline is not a tomato can, which you agree with, so what's the problem? Explain.

A broken ankle that occurred during a one punch knockdown that shook Grant so badly, he fell under his own feet. This is like saying Vitali wasn't stopped by a Lewis punch, he was stopped by a cut.

Well what the hell does "Nothing Special" mean? There's nothing there to counter. You have to give me some sort of concrete point to argue against. "Nothing Speical" "Nothing to Write Home About" Even "Marquee Win" can have ambiguous meaning.

I'm not going to lay out an argument only for you to say..."I didn't say they were bad" "I didn't say they were great" or "You are bigging em up" What the hell is the point in that.

Okay this is more concrete. You are stating he is overrated because you don't feel he was an elite Heavyweight. I disagree, he was an elite heavyweight from 2000 to 2006.

A fighter's worth can only be measured by what he achieves in contrast to his peers. Byrd was one of the most successful fighters of his time. If he wasn't elite who do you rate over him from 2000-2006? I can't think of many credible arguments.

I don't judge on style points. If that was the case, there are many marquee wins that would be deemed travesty.

 

Clearly, I have followed the conversation just fine. You needn't have responded to my comment at all. But, you did and asked me a plain question in return. I answered you back, just as plainly, without any counter-questions and, from that point, you really have had no reason to continue the conversation.

Instead, it would seem that you have felt compelled to justify your use of 'the opposition of Wlad's opposition', which is what I initially commented on. In doing so, you have only justified my initial inquiry. You are indeed able to put a sheen on just about anything you write about.

This content is protected

Have you actually seen the McCline/Grant fight?

If you want to compare a flash KD and a freak occurrence, as a result of it, to the Lewis/Klitschko fight then it just shows how far you're prepared to take your polishing.

On this basis alone, I can't really take your viewpoint on Byrd and Povetkin seriously. However, I will state that, if you think the issue with WK/Povetkin fight can be boiled down to a matter of judging on "style points", then I can't believe you have actually watched that fight, either. It was a disgrace and could never be classed as a marquee bout.

The rest of your post and the one prior is essentially noise.

 

You're talking about post #272, aren't you? You should link to it from time to time just so that Dino doesn't forget his shellacking.

You could bring it up casually:

"I love lemon gelato and post #272 in THIS THREAD"

I thought Dino's nuts fell off after he welched on that ban bet he lost with Mongoose?

 

You skipped on answering why Calvin Brock is so good to post this? Why? Because its all you're good at since ydksab.
Loser , keep my name out of your mouth. You post about me more than the sport.
Actually your entire post history consists of me Wladamir Klitschko and GGG. Stop obsessing over me. You look like a weirdo.

 

Oh, so before, following me around was fun ... now, not so much, eh?

Let's talk about welching on bets.

I hear you may have some insight on the subject?

 

Never welched on any bet. You're obsessed with me and can't keep me out of your mouth. Go ahead and put me on ignore. Be strong. You're 40 years old and come to a sporting forum to troll its members. Walk away from me. Become your own person.

 

Ol Dino is confusing me with Cobra, now. I never said I'd ignore you.

But you're right on one thing. I need to go and do something useful right now.

 

How'd your pick for WK Joshua go again?

 

Yes you did. Why are you lying?

 

Problem Wlad has is he lacks a signature win over a great fighter. He's got nothing on his resume like Lewis beating Holyfield, Ali beating Foreman etc. Ironically like his brother his last fight a loss might end up being the fight that has a more lasting influence on his standing as a heavyweight champion.

But currently I have him just inside my top 10 ATG heavyweights. Though what Joshua goes on to do next will effect on his leagcy. If Joshua goes on to dominate for a decade like Wlad, it would be a huge boost to Wlad's legacy.

 

An amazing performance (though a loss) at 41 & semi retired has no damaging legacy impact at all. In context it actually has the opposite.. He has 41 year old legs & lungs! What 40+ year old HW historically has had continued & sustained dominance?? None.. People forget WK essentially trains himself now too!!

His performance was amazing yes but i think it speaks to Joshua's limitations as much as WK's current status physically. WK proved he can BOX & go to WAR.. & as a WK fan i was incredibly proud. The detractors can ****-off.. At 41 against a behemoth like Joshua that was amazing. Look at the twitter reaction & his peers reactions..

Congrats AJ & WK.