Why did Tyson lose to Douglas? Why did Lewis lose to Rahman? Why did Vitali lose to Byrd? Why did Holyfield lose to Ruiz? Seriously folks, this kind of crap questions get really old.
It's a crap question but a valid one. It's like calling fighters such as Tyson or Lewis disgraces for losing to lesser fighters also.
If you didn't know that, there is nothing else i can say. :roll: Oh, and you can call me ***. This is something far more acceptable than having to live with your brain.
He's changed, in a way that makes him **** to watch. Minimum risk fighting for the maximum effectiveness. He uses his physical attributes to dominate relatively small fighters at range and is super cautious of taking clean shots. He's mastered how to protect a weak beard.
During his reign the only significant opponents he hasn't fought are Ruiz and Valuev. Are you claiming he ducked them?
Did he or did he not KO Ray Austin, Tony Thompson and Hasim Rahmann? Are these guys small heavyweights?
I'm not even a fan of wlad I was the first to jump on the bandwagon to say he fights with such a boring style after the chagaev fight but to deny the fact that he's changed since his last loss is just pure hating. I don't get how people can be so biased. That's not to say I don't agree Wlads losses to weaker opposition are a blight on his career but he's changed since there's no doubting that.
Wlad's footwork is leagues better nowadays. Compare him now to around 02-03 and you see two completely different fighters from the waist down. He used to fight flat-footed and from a crouch. Now, he's on his toes and usally always moving while keeping tall. that's the biggest change/improvement imo.
Even if you want to make the argument that he's changed you won't be able to prove just how much he's changed because he really hasn't been up against any very good fighters.
a mobile 6'6' boxer who fights tall and on his toes while constantly moving as opposed to a stationary lump who fights out of a crouch is harder to hit :nut doesn't matter who he's facing