A detailed and comprehensive break down of the horrendous heavyweight era we are in.

So you think someone is prone to getting cut because they got cut in one fight? Silly.

Power is a minimal requisite when it comes to cutting somone, so Kevin Johnson would have been just as likely to cut him as Lewis. It's a luck issue, and an anomaly. If it happened more than once, you can ask questions. But it didn't. Ditto with the Byrd fight. Anyone saying otherwise there is just being silly.

 

He was addicted to crack cocaine wasnt he? What a fantastic athlete that makes him, he would defintitely be the top 10 of this era though right:rofl

 

Galento was an extremely dirty fighter who got a lot of wins thanks to being one dirty mother****er.

He had a very good chin and was pretty good...

His losses don't matter that much.

It's more that Louis fought a man who had been catching punches with his limited defence for 100 fights long.
Galento also didn't have a good resume.

 

Defensive vulnerabilities. Not necessarily chin. My fault, should have clarified. Let's just say they all had big weaknesses. Like in this era.

Foreman vs Ali was a horrible fight. Clear proof of a weak era.

 

Foreman vs Ali today would be something like this:
"Lame, heavyweights can't go 15 rounds anymore like they could in the past"

Oh well, maybe it would be fun if Wlad got stripped of his belts to stir the division a little up.

 

He almost certainly would be, actually. I'll defend the Klitschko's against those who have an agenda against him. But Thomas would definitely be a top 10 fighter in this era.

 

Worse? Lennox has admitted he hardly trained and he came in heavier..is this not proof enough for you? Dont be blind.

Ability? He lost to the only great fighter he fought and that fighter was way past it and again he lost with a face that looked like it had been put through a mincer.

Career? Do you not see the thread up there titled "T.K.O 6". The Lennox lost will always be apart of his career. I also never mentioned his career? He has had a great career just he's had it in a very weak era.

 

No era is filled with perfect fighters. Its a sweeping generalisation but the post Lewis era has been dreadful, poor quality fighters in ****, boring fights.

:blood

You were making some reasonable, coherent points in this thread up till now.

 

Yea because the hardest hitter of all time making you goto the ropes is a weak fight.

Pretty sure Holyfield and most recently Briggs stating that every punch a old fat 40something year old Foreman hit them with hurt. Cut that age by twenty and anyone of this era wouldn't go beyond 1round.

 

Vitali's opposition as a whole isn't the strongest. It's not a case of the era being hugely weak, but Wlad fighting the better opponents.

Besides, the thread is about the heavyweight landscape now, not through the majority of Vitali's career.

 

Anybody could say that.
Lewis coming in heavier is proof enough though, and he was also a little soft.

Vitali didn't have a great career, his resume is totally lacking.

 

Wladimir could not establish his "fight" when he fought someone who decided to bull rush in the fight vs Sam Peters.

He barely gets hit because todays fighter let him make the first move which is horrendous.

 

It was a poor fight. A tactical triumph, but a poor fight. No-one is saying that Ali should have stood and traded from Round 1. But Dr Mo is equating exciting fights with a strong era. Hence the mention of Ali/Foreman.

 

You changed the subject. I said this weak is era because a 41year old is champion but in any other era he is a top fighter but he's not a champion same goes with his brother.

 

Then how the fck do you fight Foreman?Ali didn't have his younger feet. Stand and go toe to toe? ******