How Harmful Will Wladimir Klitschko's Unavenged...

The Corrie Sanders loss is extremley damaging. Sanders was never rated in the top 10, and had not beaten one ranked contender in his career until he knocked out wlad. Even after the wlad fight, he would still never go on to defeat a rated contender.


The Ross Purrity knockout loss is horribly damaging, because he got stopped late ahead on points due to stamina problems. Purrity was nothing more than a journeyman, and wlad was undefeated 24-0 and this has never been avenged.


Luckily the Brewster loss was avenged brutally, but that was pretty damaging too in the way he lost. Wlad knocked him down beat the hell out of him for 4 rounds then wlad let a win escape from him by somehow getting tired just like the purrity fight and showing no mental toughness and he panicked and was TKO'd.


I think these losses prevent him from being top 10, but he can still squeeze into the top 20-25

 

I agree with that. 3 KO losses (two never avenged) when your in your twenties to non elite fighters prevent him from making top ten all time. If he unified another belt, beats povetkin, etc. he will probably be in my top 20 maybe top 15 though.

 

If Wlad unifies once more to gain 3 belts and then beats Valuev, Potvekin, Virchis, Haye and Chagaev and .......He will move into my top 15-20.

 

I agree that these losses will prevent Wlad from ever reaching the elite, but saying that he will never go beyond top 20-25 is a bit premature. Wlad has beaten many top rated fighters and has even avenged one of those losses, albeit against a faded Brewster. He is 32 years old, and has a fairly tough schedule ahead of him. Should he manage to dominate his weight class, he should be a candidate to take a higher place than you have designated for him. We have to consider that many all time greats, ( including one of your favorites, Joe Walcott ), suffered not 3, but many losses early in their careers....

 

Not very damaging. He's shown too much improvement since those fights. If Ali had lost to Doug Jones would it have affected his legacy? No. If Frazier lost to Bonavena, Lewis to Bruno and so on, it wouldn't have been a true reflection on their skills. Carlos Monzon lost early in his career, yet none of those fights are worth mentioning in pitched head to head fights.

His weaknesses shone through on those fights, but right now he doesn't have the same weaknesses. He lost against Sanders because he panicked which he no longer does. He lost against Purrity because he got tired and against Brewster he was knackered and flustered.

These weaknesses are no longer there, I don't think, so why should they define his legacy?

It looks awful losing three times to such poor fighters, of course, but if he beats Haye, Povetkin, Chagaev and Peter again, I think the losses should be ignored when his legacy is brought up.

 

A reasonable post

 

You said he doesn't panic anymore. But I watched the Peter fight, and I remember before that 3rd knockdown wlad appeared to panic, suddenly got really winded then dropped down without even being hit....it looked like he was ready to quit there for a second. I congratulate him on managing to get up and carry on that fight, but if peter hadnt been so damm slow and tired himself who knows what would have happened. wlad hasnt been in with a puncher since the peter fight, so we got to wait until someone will test him again.

 

Wlad offered a lot of money to fight Purrity a few years ago.. Purrity turned it down. If Wlad picked Purrity for a title shot, there would be outrage. In fact, some were upset that a re-match with Sanders was possible. With some critics, its darned if you do and darned if you do not.

Are three losses in 50+ fights at heavyweight that bad? Not really. The truth is many ATG's were KO'd by lesser fighters and weaker punchers. Others ATG’s were out boxed by guys who would be lucky to win two rounds vs Wlad. This is why I think some posters are hyproctical when it comes to ranking heavyweights.

How many losses did Jack Johnson avenge?
How many losses did Max Schemling avenge?
How many losses did Ezzard Charles avenge?
How many losses did Joe Walcott avenge?
How many losses did Floyd Patterson avenge?
How many loses did George Foreman avenge?
How many losses did Mike Tyson Avenge?

Less than Wlad in ever case! Yet it does not prevent these guys from top 20 slots. If Wlad keeps on a roll, a spot on the top 15 is very doable. I think he is already in the top 20 now.

 

Peter was a 25 year old contender who was unbeaten in 24 fights, and later won a world title, yet Wlad still won. This was not a weak or subpar win by any means.

 

Im not trying to say that by any means Magoo, I am impressed with wlads win over Sam Peter, a good fighter. However I responding to the post made by a gentleman who said "wlad doesnt Panic anymore".

 

Fair enough,

And I wasn't trying to criticize your post either. Wlad has some weaknesses, and some things that may very well prove to keep him out of the elite. For now however, he is a question mark. This next year will be critical for him.....

 

Yes he Did. You know my thoughts on his 1930s fights, how he shouldnt have even been granted a boxing liscene then.....so I wont go into those losses.


Ill go into his post WW II losses.........


If we look from the years 1945-1947..........Walcott took on 12 fights against top contenders in just a 3 year span capping it off with a title winning performance against Joe Louis. Most of those fights were against Top ranked contenders. Walcotts record in these 12 fights counting the louis robbery as a win is 10-2. Count the Louis I fight as a loss and his record against 12 ranked contenders in a 3 year span is still and oustanding 9-3.





So If wlad from 2008-2010 takes on Thomson, Chagaev, Virchis, Haye, Peter Rematch, Valuev, perhaps Potvekin in a trilogy, Alex Dimetrenko, and perhaps eddie chambers......that would be equivalent to what walcott went through in a 3 year span. If wlad goes 9-3 or 10-2 agains that........I will be extremley impressed.

 

I think part of this is right. Wlad is now a great clincher. He can tie a guy up with great technique, speed and strength. He knwos this, so is less likely to " panic ". When Wlad fought Sanders, and Brewster, these clinching skills were lacking, which is a big reason why he lost.

I think Wlad is in his prime now, and was better than he was in 2002-2003.