Wlad Klitschko has the worst style for Ali

He may have been too

 

Fury had done very little in his career at that stage though. It makes sense the odds makers would make him a big underdog because at that point he had virtually nothing in the way of accomplishments.

Id give Holyfield of 2006/2007 good odds at beating Fury if I was only rating him on what he did pre Wlad.

 

[ I beg to differ, the worst post of the thread was him calling Muhammad Ali MAYBE, keyword "MAYBE" a little bit faster than Wlad, so this fellow brother could actually try to compel an argument explaining why Wlad and Ali were equally as fast
post of the month contender

 

The guy’s a joke.

He must be trolling.

 

It’s a great debate.

But can I ask you an honest question.

On a serious note now, why do you think that nobody from the 70’s are better than today’s guys?

Ate you saying in general?

Or are you saying that there’s literally nobody from that era who is better than any one of today?

 

You're a joke.

 

TIMBER!!!

 

I mentioned in another post that I was mainly talking about HWs. The main reason is because of the evolution aspect - we get bigger. But there is also more to it that helps all other aspects. Nutrition, modern sports science, history, etc. You know all this. I am NOT saying that there is nobody from the 70s that is better than today. However, why don't we do this. You post the best fighters from the 70s by weight class and I will do the same for the 2010s (the last full decade) and we can compare who is the better decade from a H2H comparison.

 

The one thing that has happened with boxing is that super-heavies have become good. Back in the day guys like Willard were considered formidable due to size alone. But generally these big guys had woeful skills. Nowadays dudes like Lewis, Wlad, Fury etc have shown that a massive size advantage + world class skills means that smaller fighters struggle a lot.

Take for example Povetkin, who is a fighter I like a lot and who had an all-round skillset. He could do nothing against Klitschko. And yet he would have been considered a very big dude back in 'the day'.

 

Okay.

Thanks for clarifying.


We’ve come a long way with sports science etc.

That certainly aids fighters.

But there has been no continuous evolution.


I’m sure that you’re aware that there’s many fighters from the 70’s and earlier, who were better than many of today’s guys.

We can assess their skill sets and look fairly at their resumes.


Yes, we can do a comparison.

And before we even look at the results, I know that they’ll be mixed.

Just like through any other eras.

The MW eras of the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s were stacked. But today it’s a weak division. A very weak division.

If we compare today’s HW division from certain points in the 70’s, the 70’s was more stacked and had better fighters.

The WW’s of the early 80’s were better than the current group.

There’s whole divisions from various eras which were superior than today.


Maybe it would be better if we could do a separate thread.

But it will certainly show mixed results.

It would show mixed results from pretty much any era.


This has all been done before.

Many times.

There’s a myth that there’s continual evolution. But there’s clear proof that that simply isn’t the case.

A recent comparison was made between today’s current HW division and the division from the early 90’s.

A comparison from Wlad’s reign with parts of the 70’s.

Also, today’s top 10 P4P fighters, were compared to other years from 25-30 years ago.

It’s a very common debate here.


Again, the results of any comparison will always be mixed.

Simply because the sport just ebbs and flows.

Sometimes the divisions are great. They’re stacked. Both in terms of talent and depth.

But sometimes they’re average, and sometimes they’re weak.


Again, thanks for the clarification.

I originally questioned what you’d said, because let’s be honest, what you said was completely ignorant.

And it reads different from your current explanation.

 

I am not saying Ernie Terrell is on the same standing as Wlad, but i could see the fight going in a similar fashion.
He was 6 ft 6 big fella with a long reach and good jab.

What Wlad has in his favour is a very good left hook.

 

Klitschko should have gotten disqualified for that bull****. That win is an asterisk on his resume

 

Ali had the speed and the mental strength, but Vlad had the hook, right hand and the jab the size and enough of a chin to make it a tough fight for Ali- Ernie Terrel was the biggest man Ali fought, and he was nothing near Vlad - interesting fight

 

I agree that was a **** fight. They shoudl have had a rematch with a proper ref that didn't allow all the clinching.

However:

1 Let's not pretend that Wlad was the first or the last champion to clinch excessively
2 By the end of the fight Povetkin was actually initiating more clinches than Wlad.

 

Wlad actually claims to be 6'5 and looks a bit taller than Terrell to me so I think Terrell is probably more like 6'5.

That was a impressive performance from Ali though I think he won almost every round but in the same note Wlad did very well against shorter speeder fighters.