Why doesn't Wlad have a spot on most people's Top 10 ATG HW lists?

Very good post indeed!!

Wlad had more defenses than Holmes: both lost 2 of them, but 23 successful defenses for Wlad & 20 for Holmes.
one reign of 7 years vs. 2 (which is not easy) of 10.

I wonder if seemingly weak eras are mostly one guy being more dominant.
For example, Louis fought in a weak era?
I dunno, were the 20's & early 30's really stronger?
Then the following one...Marciano's *best* competition~> his rating is doubted because the best he beat were past their primes!
So that means they were prime during The Brown Bomber's time.
Although for a good part of the 1970's & 1990's it did seem stronger...

Googling it, 8-12 is the common rating for Wlad.
But I do not see how this is not too low.
You well illustrated how he is underrated.
Yet I cannot see how, for example, I do not like his clinching & how boring he was can deny someone so dominant a place between #3 & #6 max.

Everyone has flaws.
But those prime losses are not nearly enough to obviate his massive accomplishments.
They were not for Lewis, & both would be Huge head to head, Lewis also had some lackluster performances with those who should not have been so difficult (Mercer compared to how old Holmes handled him, the could only fight in spurts Holyfield 2, etc.


But most folks want to rate guys they LIKE higher, but that is not rational & justified.

 

I tried to move Wlad into my top 10 but fell asleep through boredom every time I saw his name…

Joking aside, I have him at 14 in my top 20 - the main strength for a top 10 place is the number of title defenses (18 consecutive), which puts him in rare company - my number 1 Joe Louis had 25 and my number 3 Larry Holmes had.20 and also my number 2 Ali had 19 in total (but they was split over 2 reigns, not continuous). Other than them, Wlad is streets ahead of the other members of the top 10 in this regard.

Title duration is only bettered by Joe Louis, but importantly Wlad was never undisputed champ, although once Vitali had retired he was the consensus choice as champion. I don’t personally blame him for not facing his brother but from a historical standpoint, that doesn’t help his case.

He also had those 3 earlier career defeats and KOs against him, which is hard to get out of people’s minds when comparing him with other greats of the division.

Once he found the formula with Manny Steward to use his size the right way, he was able to dominate his opposition but it really depends on how you rate the opposition, which was ‘mixed’ at best. And, let’s face it, his defenses were largely very dull to watch - entertainment is a factor.

I think we’re seeing now that time and distance are to his benefit and that his ranking will get higher the further removed from his career we get.

 

But 23 successful title defenses. barely second to Louis, just like his 10 year length of reign-& Louis had no fights during WW2

Boring should not be relevant to ranking. He was never my favorite to watch.
And I just doubt that any recent era can be that different from adjoining ones.
14 seems very low indeed!

 

Top post Jel. You've hit basically all the key points, both ways.

 

That feels like a good idea for a separate thread discussion. I think it’s actually highly debatable.

 

I have him outside my HW top ten. He possibly sneaks top 15.
For me, who was a boxing fan back in the 90s and 2000s and watched his whole career real time, his standing is damaged by being badly splattered, there times, after being hailed as the heir apparent (Purrity, Sanders, Brewster), and later ruling over a very weak division. Those early losses are hard to erase in nature, but I think he does deserve huge credit for coming back in the way that he did. He seemed absolutely finished at times.
But that run in the 2000s, long as it was, was generally against weak opposition at a time when the division was in the doldrums. Plus some of his jab and grab \ shove tactics were pretty shameful at times. I understand why some people rate him highly, but I have a lot of asterixes against him. And I would be cautious backing him in many head 2head hypothetical fights in a way that I wouldn't with other ATGs - I just think he'd find a way to blow it.

 

Yeah do it man!

While Wlad is not my favorite fighter, especially sometimes being a clinch-aholic, I do not see how with such massive success as a HW, for 23 straight defenses over 2 reigns & 10 years...

Cannot see him ranking in the double digits!

 

I just do not see any modern era as so dramatically lesser than adjacent eras. It does not seem possible. Lewis in way less fights had 2 bad prime losses & some weak wins, many HWs got gift decisions, such as Ali & Louis...

All Wlad's victories cannot be dismissed as HW beings so bad.

 

Flirts between 3 and 6 in my list. Sometimes he's second to Ali...depends how I am 'framing' my list that day. I suspect both Ali and Holmes beat him. But I think Wlad sparks Louis....but my 'list' is never pure H2H, it is a movable feast of debate and argument...

 

I love your avatar. Fraud you say?

 

suggesting what, that it would be an unforgivable sin to state that a fighter or some fighters might indeed have been placed & secured into position?

I mean it is Boxing we're talking about, the most Crooked & Exploited sport/BUSINESS in History.

 

Lewis absolutely splatters him

 

You're preaching to the choir my good man.

Wlad was a cure for insomnia.

Please elaborate.

Edit: How do you pronounce your name?

 

I don't think so. I've discussed this before but I think the devil in Lewis is his undoing here. He liked to have a fight and for a second, a minute of a round, his plan wandered, more obviously in his second 'safety first' career and, at some point, Wlad walks him onto a big right hand and the curtain falls.

Edit. I didn't mention Lewis in my original post, I mentioned Louis.

 

Yep, I think Wlad can do some damage on Lennox. Unfortunately I do not favor him here.

This is a fight that should end up on a Top 10 list of missed opportunities.