Wladimir Klitschko moves to a tie for 4th all time with 15 wins in title fights.

This content is protected

 

Yeah. Or his brother has to retire.

 

Holmes never unified at all despite nearly half his career being title fights. **** happens.

Truth is, the only thing stopping Wlad from another belt was WBA politics. Chagaev's title should've been on the line in that fight which would've given him the WBA, IBF, WBO, and Ring belt. 3 ABC belts happened to be the same level of unification Lewis reached after Holyfield 2. So either you consider Wlad undisputed after Chagaev, or Lewis himself was never undisputed himself.

The arguments against him in this thread is another case of people holding Wlad to a higher standard than prior champions for any number of personal reasons. If we start picking apart the particulars on him, it's only fair to put all the prior champs under the same microscope.

 

Since 2000 wlad has had 17 title fights, lost only 2 of them, and has knocked out 21 opponents.

Thats a pretty ****ing impressive run....

I rate Wlad above Tyson.... They both dominated a similar division

 

If it counts now than it has to count back than too, just because Dela Homo and some other well known guys beat some scrubs to get easy belts, doesn't mean it should count. If we count WBO, Should we start counting WBU and IBO too?

 

The WBO belt didnt mean **** when Wlad and VK held it. It def means more today(not sure how the **** that happened like there inst enough belts out there). And when Wlad held the WBO title his defences were against Derrick Jefferson, Charles Shufford, Frans Botha, Ray Mercer(41 years old), Jameel McCline and then lost it to Corrie Sanders. Now thats a sad list when the best fighter you beat is Baby Huey. As a champion he was certainly not "making" that belt in that time span.

 

Nope sorry, but Tyson didn't have anyone that could make a claim to being the champ in the 80s because he KO'd all of em and won all the belts, Wlad has NOT done this.

 

This content is protected

 

His first reign with that belt should mean nothing, neither should his current reign, him winning the IBF title was huge, But Tyson, Lewis and other greats didn't win or **** with that bogus ass title so why should he be credited title defenses for it? Are we gonna start counting other bogus belts like IBO, WBF, WBU and others?

 

The WBOGUS doesn't count, BTW Tyson Unified the belts, and became undisputed, Wlad has never held, the WBC or the WBA title. So according to the IBHOF Wlad is way behind Tyson.

 

IMO Wlad has the WBA belt!

Valuev refuses to fight Chagaev for the mandatory and Chagaev did not lost his belt in the ring.

Wlad fought Chagaev and win so he is the real WBA Champion!

 

This content is protected

 

And who exactly can make a claim to being the champ???? His brother who took a 4 year break to come back against a guy wlad beat???? Or a former cruiser whose had 3 fights and holds a paper title???


So tyson's opposistion is good, because they all got koed early....

But wlads opposistion is worse, because they survive late and then get koed??


Wlad is a much better boxer than tyson, to be able to be so dominant with a glass jaw like that, that takes alot of skill.....

Tyson had all the talent in the world and pissed it away, Wlad has his vunerabilities and found a way to overcome them....

Thats the difference between them, and why i rate klit higher

 

He beat the WBA champion..... Just because the belt wasnt on the line, does not take away from the win.....

And who have the recent wbc champs been???

Lewis (retired)
Vitali (brother)
Rahman (wlad has a win over him)
Maskaev (shot)
Peter (wlad has a win over him)
Vitali ( brother)

He is obviously the heavyweight champion....... WHo else can say they are HW champ today??