Why is unifying the titles important? He has already beat the true WBA Champ... he beat the last two guys to hold the WBC before his brother... he won the IBF, WBO and is the Ring Magazine Champion. He has consistently dominated top ten heavyweights for the last 6 years. Tell me how Haye's WBA title means anything? Chagaev beat Valuev for the title... Wlad beats Chagaev... They give the title back to Valuev and Haye "wins" it from him. How does that mean anything? Chagaev was the true WBA Champ when Wlad knocked him out. Unifying those paper titles mean nothing.
THey have certianly did some *house cleaning* in the division not seen since Lewis limped off into retirement.
Lewis never even came close to cleaning out the division. Honestly... he has one of the most overrated "Title reigns" that I have ever seen. Lewis wasn't considered "Champ" until he beat Holyfield. So... here is Lewis' amazing title reign.... Michael Grant - We all know what he is. Frans Botha - Fresh off being knocked out by Mike Tyson. David Tua - Very good win (although he was hammered by the public the same way that Wlad was against Ibragimov for this fight. I think he did what he had to do, and it was a big win for him. Hasim Rahman - Knocked Lewis out. Hasim Rahman - Lewis wins back his titles. Mike Tyson - A completely worthless win, against a horribly washed Vitali Klitschko - We all know the story here... and Lewis was actually supposed to fight Kirk Johnson. Then Lewis retires 8 months later after the WBC forces him to fight Vitali or be stripped of his title. In that 8 months... Lewis was trying to sue Mike Tyson back into the ring and fight Roy Jones Jr. Seriously... why on earth do people think this is some kind of amazing title reign? 6-1 with only 2 good solid wins against a dangerous opponent. Vitali would be a big win had he not been losing and won only on a cut. Then retired rather than giving fans a rematch. I gave him a big win against Rahman too... which is really only a big win because Rahman knocked him out in the fight before.
And you talk of bollocks. You mean the same Young that beat Foreman and arguably beat Ali has no chance at either Klit? What do they have a breeding program here? And then this gem. Says it all. They both fought in 8 division eras and were both light-heavyweights. The suggestion that Charles and Tunney would not do well post the 1960's is ridiculous.
So if you can't compare them in the time machine, does mean your left comparing them against the competition in their era? So you have to rate them about 70 based on the current HW division?
Mr bill shut up about the klits beating up on young. those two robots haven't bear a single opponent compareable to the likes of Ron Lyle, George foreman, norton, or shavers. IMO vitali would get outboxed and wlad would win a close desicion after having some real trouble.
yes they are highly criticized but these guys are racking up wins and just like Joe Calzage even though its been against mediocre opposition it has to mean they are at least pretty good.
Unfortunately they will neither get the chance to prove greatness against another great which isn't there fault, but i can't remember the last time we had such a dominant force in the heavyweight division. Tyson was the last and he had a bunch of b- at best comp in his era just like the klits do. Tyson is considered a great and so are the klits. each brother easily makes the top 10 of ATG heavies H2H.