Alexander Povetkin vs. Deontay Wilder-Wilder Is Underrated And Povetkin Is Overrated.

You're certifiable. Abdu's only decent win was against shot McCline, who kd'd Abdu before Adbu pulled it out. Arreola beat a more prime version of McCline much more easily. Arreola was in turn beaten by Stiverne. There is no rational argument that Abdu is remotely on the level of Stiverne. Just none.

Also, Takam's best (really only notable) win is against Thompson. Scott (a different Wilder victim) beat Thompson too. Again, you have no rational argument that Takam is top 10 and Wilder victims like Scott and Stiverne are not.

 

Tell that to Spzilka, Liakhovich, and even Firtha. You know the man Povetkin couldn't knock out.

 

I have an autographed 8X10 of Wladimir Klitschko framed above my desk staring into my soul right now.

Don't make assumptions. Don't drink so much salt water.

 

Congratulations. You are not using that as some kind of ana logy, are you?

Maybe I haven't understood what you were trying to say, but the Klitschkos era is definitely not the weakest in boxing history. Those are the lines most commonly used by the people who hate on Klitschkos and try their best to discredit them.

Let's take one example, it is much stronger than the era of Jack Johnson.

 

I disagree. Jeannette, Langford, McVea... all three would be the second or at worst third best HW of the Klitschko Era. Why? Because every and any ranking ever proves just that.

It's all just opinion.

Wladimir has always been one of my favorite fighters. Doesn't mean I can't keep it real about his era. Now he is a legit ATG HW because he pretty much routinely fought every remotely warranted challenger and thrashed an absurd number of them while atop the division. But the era is ridiculously weak. He has a strong legacy for his crazy resume. But the weak era is what it is. He can't help it that nobody ever stood out or accomplished anything of much note other than Povetkin and his big brother during the entire 10+ year stretch. But that reality contributes to my opinion that this is the weakest era in history (perhaps there may be one other decade or era of similar note, perhaps).

* as for my salt water comment, just a little dig at you sounding salty... don't worry, it's not personal and I won't remember your screenname tomorrow.

 

Well, you don't want to seriously put much into that argument, do you? You would be in a very tough position backing that. But anyway, if that's what you truly believe, so be it.

 

That's crazy, you'd put little 5'10 Sam McVea of the 18 losses and no ATG wins, 5'10 Jeannette of 26 losses and no ATG wins, and 5'7 Langford with over 30 losses and no ATG wins over Vitali (and Povetkin, and for that matter Sanders, Peter and Byrd)?! Whatever. I'd rank each of the K era fighters I named above all of them combined, resume, h2h, you name it.

 

A lot of bloggers around here like to sound like they are sophisticated by name dropping old timers like that and putting them above modern fighters with an indisputably better legacy. Langford gets a lot of unwarranted attention like that, especially. He never beat anyone, which is the argument people use against Vitali, but is often ranked higher on lists than Vitali out of a desire to deprecate Vitali and sound sophisticated, despite having a terrible record that is not at all comparable to some of the more modern greats he is often listed above.

 

And that's your opinion.

Odd to rank any current HW other than Klitschko ahead of Langford, McVea, and Jeannette. Maybe you haven't studied eras of the distant past. It's OK. This is merely my opinion.

 

Cool, cool.

(I wasn't being mean to him)

 

Honestly, I view that as a can't-lose argument. But I can acknowledge it's just an opinion.