2004 Brewster vs 2015 Wlad

At that fight 2004 there was someting wrong with Klitschko.
Klitschko of 2015 knocks out Brewster of 2004

Brewster was a great fighter and underrated but even the 2004 version of Klitschko would win 8 of 10 fights vs Brewster.

 

Brewster took a hell if a beating and was close to being stopped when Wlad ran out of gas and collapsed

Brewster was tough and resilient but he wasn't a great fighter, really should have lost to Kali Meehan too
Wlad of today is slower but would maintain distance and win probably by stoppage

 

Wlad post Brewster doesn't do anything differently other than hold like an octopus.

Not being able to hold is what lost him the fight. 2015 Wlad who also wasn't allowed hold and tire out Jennings gets shattered in similar fashion.

 

Brewster that beat Wlad would beat the Wlad that fought Jennings.
Brewster was willing to walk through hell that night. Without the excessive holding, 2015 Wlad will eventually succumb to the relentlessness.

 

Brewster was very overrated as a fighter, but would again easily destroy the older, faded 2015 wlad much quicker.

 

how does he win by stoppage is brews if so resilent like you claim, when wlad has only got weaker, less durable and less fit in the time since?

u appear to be in kliturd dreamland.

 

yup, that thing wrong with him being that he isnt good enough to beat decent journeymen.

 

Anyone who's not a moron can see Brewster didn't beat Wlad. Brewster just happened to be in the ring when Wlad got sick. Wlad was out in his feet before Brewster landed a punch

 

so its unfortunate for your post how wlad "got sick" after being pounded out by decent journeyman brew.

 

Resilient fighters get stopped, just because I said he's tough doesn't mean he can't be KO'd

Wlad had him in big trouble in round 3 and 4 but wilted

Sure Brewster was past it for the rematch but the fight went about the same way as fight 1 without Wlad tiring

I think the loss was ultimately a fluke

 

so you are saying wlad couldn't stop him.

it went the way a prime vs a shot2shyte always goes, nothing like the first fight where Brewster destroyed wlad.

its not a fluke that you lose because he was about to retire, its because you are shot.

 

Brewster and Wlad fought 13 rounds, Brewster was successful in one of those rounds

Wlad proved to be the better boxer, the loss is one of the biggest flukes in recent boxing.

 

You self owned yourself.

Brewster was in no trouble during round 3. It was Wlad who got clocked with a big shot and spent most of the round trying to back hump Brewster.

Wlad battering Brewster for 4 one sided rounds is a myth. I watched the fight very closely recently and realized thats just a lie that has snowballed.

Wlad won the first clearly. The second and third could have went either way. The second was mostly Wlad being warned for using cheat tactics.
Brewster was winning the fourth and was landing very damaging body shots before he was cought with a big right hand.
That was the best Wlad done in the whole fight. One right hand in the 4th round. And he couldn't follow up on it as he was forced to box the full 3mins - which he cannot do.
Understand the sport ffs.
Fluke my azzzzzz

 

always a "fluke" when wlad loses.

not surely a fluke that hes the one long term champion inentire boxing history who consistently loses to (ie gets destroyed by) decent journeymen without a hint of immediately revenging the bad loss.

just, wow how blind are you to turn them into flukes.

Brews was better than wlad, end of.