Wladimir Klitschko Retires - Where Does He Rank ?

Dempsey and Wills.

 

i don't put him near that high but i understand where you are coming from.

 

Yes. Dempsey falls outside my 10.

 

bottom of the top 10. like Lewis, he recovered from a few horrendous losses to better adapt his style to utilize his height and compensate for a fragile chin - to dominate a weak division. But, his competition was even worse than that of Lewis, so he rates lower than Lennox.

 

It will be interesting to re-visit this thread in 2027. We have a tendency to appreciate things of old more than the here and now. Wlad is currently still the latter.

I clearly remember being called a complete ****** in 2004, before joining ESB, for arguing that Lewis was top10, if not top5 material. Same with Holyfield ("Naw man, he was inconsistent, lost to his peers, would've lost to Tyson in 1990, and lost to Ruiz yo!"). Both are accepted as top10 today. I imagine Holmes wasn't expected to rate very highly in 1989, either.

I fully expect the same thing to be true of Wlad in ten years time.

 

You missed Povetkin, Chagaev, and Byrd II. Significant wins and in total a very good list compared to most champions. Compare it to some of these:
Ruddock I, II, Spinks, Holmes(old), Tucker, Thomas, and Berbick.
Charles I, II, Walcott I, II, Louis (old), Moore, Layne, LaStarza I, II.
Norton (old), Shavers I, II, Cooney, Weaver, Ali (beyond old), Witherspoon, Berbick (green), Mercer.

Your last statement also makes very little sense. Here we go:
When Holmes fought a skilled right-hand puncher, he got TKO'd in 4.
When Liston fought a mobile boxer, he quit in 6.
When Louis fought a heavy hitter, he got stopped.
When Tyson faced a big skilled man who could hit, he got stopped in 8.

etc, etc.

 

Its certainly a possibility.I gave him kudos for showing the guts I doubted he possessed against Joshua.

 

Except Wlad left nothing behind to be remembered by and Lewis did. His whole career will end up being defined by getting starched by Joshua.
It practically is right now as all the praise he's been receiving after retiring is for a losing effort. And that all down to the fact of how weak his title run was.

 

Yeah Povetkin was a significant fight , the other two not.

Haye was lined up to fight Chagaev at one point but fell through because the guy wasn't healthy enough to pass a medical. Pretty sure Chaggy also failed a medical to rematch Valeuv and thats when Wlad fought him.
No , Chaggy isn't comparable to the opponents former greats.

Neither is a shot to chit Byrd who should have lost all his previous 4 defenses going into the Wlad fight in 2006. Andre Ward would have beaten that version of Chris Byrd.

Povetkin will always be the best guy he fought and that performance only strengths the argument against his greatness. No unbiased boxing fan will ever look at the fight and come away thinking they just saw an ATG.

 

Anywhere between 15-20 is fair.

The sad part is that the only semi exiting fights he ever was in are his losses..........and only hard core boxing fans remember those .......and a even smaller % of hardcore fans can point to ANY career defining wins........jab and grab only gets you that much exposure .................a long reigning Hwt champ is supposed to be the "Baddest Man" on the planet and recognized by even the most casual Sport bystander...he had zero charisma and could not intimidate a house mouse......he never crossed over outside of Germany and essentially was a ESPN Friday night fighter with a higher purse.

For the 100000000000000 time watch his encounter with Sam Peter, a extremely limited fighter who punched wide, had not footwork/speed, could not cut off the ring, no head movement or defense, in other words a tough caveman bar room brawler..........a fighter with WK's experience, physical assets and theoretical skill should have a field day with cannon fodder like Peter but he went life and death and that was PRIME WK......head to head against Liston, Ali, Foreman, Holmes , Tyson and Lewis he is going 0-6.....by KO/TKO , bank on it.

 

0-6 bank on it? Hypotheticals are called hypothetical for a reason...you can't bank on them because they can't really happen. Those 6 would make a nice thread...perhaps you should start one?

I would favor him over Foreman and Liston...Favor Tyson, Ali and Lewis over him...and struggle with the Holmes match up. I lean towards Holmes but that would be a close fun fight. I would call it 2-3 (no shame in that) with 1 undecided or draw

 

There is no chance in hell that he survives George Foreman.......WATCH the Sam Peter or Brewster fight.......Liston/Ali/Holmes means 15 and he will be collapsing in the championship rounds from pure anxiety and ko'ed by a breeze of a punch......what you guys dont get that he CANNOT take sustained skilled pressure or brute force...

 

Ahhhhh....Thank you, Mr. Boxing LOL, for clearing that up for me!

 

Solidly in the Top10 would be my guess. Somewhere around Holmes and Lewis. For me definitely ahead of Foreman, Tyson, Dempsey, Frazier, Jeffries and Holyfield. Johnson and Marciano could be argued above and below him I think. So, highest would even be Top5, lowest Top7. Kinda surprised he ended up that high but when you look at the hard facts (so, no specualitve h2h mumbo-jumbo) it's tough to have him lower IMO.

 

Top ten lock. Possibly top five. His longevity and consistency were rivalled only by Holmes and Louis and H2H he was good enough to give anyone in history a hard fight. That's a hard combination to beat.

Criticisms about the weakness of his era are hollow, in my opinion. Most every long running champ fought in a perceived weak era, and many of Wlad's opponents held impeccable Olympic credentials so were clearly not that shabby. And he never, with the exception of his brother, swerved top contenders.

To rank him outside the top ten in place of fighters like Johnson and Dempsey on any legitimate ranking criteria is an almost impossible task.