Wladamir Klitshko Vs Lennox Lewis

Lewis by mid rounds KO..

 

Yeah, but you see, LEWIS, too, has never been tested by somebody of Wlad's size, offensive skillset and experience. Only himself (Lewis) comes close.

Lennox has fought only 3(!) times against opponents as tall or taller than Wlad.
Wlad has fought against 7 opponents as tall or taller than Lewis (all won by KO).

Lennox Lewis has fought only 6(!) times against opponents as heavy as Wlad (240+).
Wlad has fought 19(!) times against opponents as heavy or heavier than Lewis (240+) (all won except Corrie Sanders, who letsnotforgetit is a southpaw).

Lennox has never in his life fought against anybody AS EXPERIENCED AS WLAD (52-3). The only comparable would be Tony Tucker (49-1), but Tucker was 6 years older than Lennox and is bummy in world title fight (whereas Wlad has more KOs in world title fights than any other heavyweight in history as far as I know). And maybe Mike Tyson (49-3), but Mike is tiny and has never scored a KO against a good taller opponent than 6'3''.

I am not saying that Wlad would win (or that Lewis would win). What I am saying that this fight would be COMPETITIVE.

 

Some could say that Rahman was stopped by Wlad, and Rahman ko'd Lewis, nd Oleg I believe, Ko'd Rahman twice, so does that mean he'd KO Lewis?

 

:huh

No that logic is dumb as dog **** my man. :good

What I mean is that apart from a lucky punch I can see no way that Wlad will win.

I could make a case for Wlad to beat nearly all of the great fighters in the past, Ali, Louis, Tyson etc.

The only two I could not really see a viable case that Wlad would win are Lewis and Holmes

 

Really? You have seen Lewis go down and be very vulnerable to right hands.. right? You may have also seen how a good jab could be VERY effective against Lewis, if you followed his career. Also, you have to have noticed that Lewis' footwork was very bad most of the time. Now... if you can't see how Wlad could possibly win that fight, I really don't know what to say.

 

In fact, all the typical complaints about his opponents "They didn't come to win, they just stood in front of him" are all misinterpretations. He beats his opponents into slavish obedience to stand directly in front of him. And those complaining "He is just jabbing, jabbing, jabbing" overlook that his left jab is like a right hook of other boxers.

The claim gets even more outrageous when you consider that the world population at Ali's times was approx. 50% of what it is now and the BOXING world was even smaller (since the east-europeans didn't participate). Thus Wladimir is of course a heavyweight world champion of a much larger world.

 

I disagree, Lennox has faced far more experience and obviously better competition than Wlad, whose best win is debatable, and the choses are Sam Peter or Chris Bryd, one was far from a natural Heavyweight and the other was 25 yearold kid when he fought, a fight that yet again displayed Wlad's weak chin and that pressure tends to be yet again his cryptonite, neither Peter or Bryd will ever be Hall of Famers, can we at least agree on that much? Lewis has fought many experienced Heavyweights with way better resumes than Wlad, Tyson for one, Holyfield blows away Wlad in resume up to that point, Mercer wasnt too far off, and of course his last fight against Vitali.

Wlad is dominant in a extremely weak division which has showcased how bad it's top fighters are, the number 2 Heavyweight losing to a guy that's been out of the ring since Nov or Dec of 04, and just recently a 46 yearold severely washed up Holyfield outworking a 7'0 tall WBA champ, who was ranked 3 or 4 at the time. Lewis on the other hand fought at one of the greatest times the Heavyweight division has seen since the 70's.

 

Holmes? Holmes has not seen anyone remotely close to Wlad.

The only ones worth mentioning that Holmes fought that were 230+ were 2x loss, 1x win by KO (against featherfist Leroy Jones) and 3x wins by decision (including Eric Esch).

The tallest fighter he has seen (Cooney, KO 13(!) only) was smaller than Wlad.

I see nothing in Holmes arsenal or record that could lead me to the conclusion that Holmes could KO Wlad or win by decision against Wlad.

 

Wlad hardly throw's any right hands untill he has jabed his oponent into submisson. He has also shown that he copes just fine with good right hands when he is at his best.

He beat plenty of fighters with good jabs, what Lewis could be sure of with the current version of Wlad is that there would be a number of rounds where Wlad would be cautious and would only throw a jab and or left hook.

Very bad? Explain.

The main problem that "the best Wlad" has against Lewis is the fact that he is fighting a guy who pretty much matches him in every area, bar perhaps footwork )lewis's is not very bad) and that he is down significantly in others infighting as the main example.

Lewis could beat Wlad in any number of ways. Wlad would have to catch Lewis with a big punch to stop him. Which i acknowleged with Wlads power he could do.

But I cannot envison it in the slightest, Lewis can match jabs pretty much, and that takes away Wlads most potent wepon.

Apart from that big money shot how could you see Wlad winning?

 

Yes but you constantly go on about height and weight and things of that nature.

Holmes has a better jab than Wlad, which = one ****ed Wlad as he has no other way to set up his offence.

 

Lewis TKO 8

 

Congratulations, that's the most sensible comment in the thread so far.

This **** comes up from time to time and the result is always the same, the sensible people go for the obvious result - Lewis by early KO very much like the Golota fight. Lewis liked to fight guys his own size and also was extremely aggressive when he knew the opponent had a weak chin. Tick both those boxes for WALD and it's an early night.

I Lewis showed up like he did against Rahman or VITLAY then WALDO has a chance of landing the bomb that finishes it but even if that happened he'd get ****ed up in the rematch just like the others did, Lewis is clearly better in every department.

 

But you seem to know how Lewis would perform against Byrd or Peter or Sanders. And you don't know.

It's true however that Lewis in his career fought fighters with a better win-loss record than Wlad has fought.

If you delete all sub-200-lbs opponents and all bummy opponents (those who lose 25% of their fights or more) then Lennox' median average win is against an 43-6 opponent, whereas Wlad's median average win is against an 43-6 opponent.

No, Byrd has one of the best records in boxing history (aside from the bashing by Wlad). Peter is a hell of a fighter who unfortunately boxes in the era of the Klitschkos. Moreover his career isn't over yet.

This is not true. There are only a handful of boxers that come close to a resumee like Wlad. I know, I have a boxing database with approx. 25000+ boxers and 150'000+ fights.

However you turn it (total KOs, KO ratio, win ratio against good opponents etc), Wlad is ALWAYS at the top. Only Lennox himself is at the top with Wlad, too. Holyfield and Ali and Foreman and Tyson are also at the top, but they fail in other regards (like KOs in world title fights etc)...

And if you mention Byrd as "natural cruiser" I mention Holyfield as a natural cruiser, too.

That's not true. Holyfield for example is a much less dangerous fighter than Wlad. Holyfield is a featherfist. There is far less danger in fighting natural cruiser Holyfield than Wlad.

Let's put it this way:
How many non-bums did Mike Tyson KO that were 6'3.5'' or taller?
ONE (of 6)

And Holyfield?
ONE (of 8 )

And Ali?
TWO (of 5)

And Wladimir Klitschko?
TEN

You see, when it comes to KOs Wlad is a completely different caliber than Holyfield. Thus you cannot deduct from Lennox' win over Holyfield that Lennox could win against Wlad.

When you erase all the cruiserweight fights of Holyfield then Holyfield's career was 18(11KOs)-3 at the time of the bout against Lennox. This is far worse than Wladimir's heavyweight record.

The world has not seen a heavyweight as experienced and successful as these two men: Lennox and Wlad, with Wlad being far more experienced than Lennox.

This is a misinterpretation. It only shows how good Vitali is, not how bad Peter is.

Holyfield is in top shape, 46 or not. Of course not as good as he was before but nevertheless top. And I disagree that he outworked Valuev. I saw him running away the whole fight. Valuev should have won even more clearly.

Both is debatable. Whether the 70ies were great (Ali, yawn), and whether the 80/90 were great.

However all your arguments about Byrd and Peter LEAD NOT to a conclusion that Lewis would win against Wlad. Wlad is DOMINATING his opponents. Lewis was far from dominating his opponents as Wlad does.

Your interpretation (in my view it's a wrong interpretation) is that the division is weak. My interpretation is that Wlad is strong.

 

Holmes' record proves you wrong. I mean, I have nothing against Holmes, I like him very much, but he has never faced anyone closely to Wlad, instead had problems with similar tall and similar heavy boxers like Wlad.