Ali vs the Wlad what fought Haye

well obviously wlad would win!
hes taller! and weighs more!

DUHH thats all thats needed in boxing remember!?!?!?

 

Well unlike Haye....Ali could mix it up and trade.

Tough fight but I take Ali on decision even late stoppage. Wlad is too basic, straight forward.

 

wladimir is not just the greatest boxer ever, hes the greatest human being to ever walk the earth.

he can do no wrong and is the chosen one. he is the pinnacle of human evolution. he has never ever been in the wrong and anyone who ever accuses him is just a hater and most likely black and cant stand a white man dominating the heavyweight division.

he has the greatest jab of all time and is the hardest hitting heavyweight ever. he is a stylistic nightmare for everyone and there is literally no formula to beat him.

 

No they were worse then Fury. They were absolute bums who mean nothing.

 

Why do you throw abusive remarks like that about when somebody just raises an issue for discussion on a forum based around debate?

 

Norton was a bum. The mere fact Ali struggled with him, makes him a bum too. One who wouldn't be in same town as Lord Wladimir, let alone in the same squared circle.

 

Norton is no better than Audley Harisson now!
infact, this is the strongest era of ALL TIME!!!!

the depth is astounding,. guys like Danny Williams who is a total bumm now is better than George Foreman of the 70's.

TAKE UR ROSE TINTED GLASSES OFF!!!!!

Samuel Peter TKO1 Ali

 

Never a truer word spoken. :deal

 

exactly

in the 70's people were living off dog meat and contaminated water.

there was NO SUCH THING AS PROTEIN!

 

:happy

:happy:happy:happy:happy:happy:happy:happy:happy:happy

 

Get it right EverLast, the proper term is KlitLicker! or haven't you heard

 

Wlad has some advantages, such as height, reach, power. But Ali has some great advantages, such as a clear speed advantage, much better fluidity and head movement, a better chin, and likely to be even craftier and adaptable.

Wlad is capable of doing some great punching, especially for a big man, such as his ability to hook off a jab, and to double or triple up his left hook. His jab, left hook and straight right are some of the best that the heavy division have ever seen. But Ali had blistering combinations - like no other heavy I have ever seen.

I think this fight would come down to a battle of wills. Ali could display superhuman willpower, and Wlad has the unfailing discipline of a robot. Would have been a good fight.

 

TBH I'm disappointed. I expected a good breakdown from you.

 

I think a peak Ali of the late 60's and maybe early 70's squeaks out a close decision over Wladimir Klitschko. Boxers Chris Byrd and Eddie Chambers both took wlad 12 rounds, and while both got dominated, Ali had some height, reach, speed, stamina, chin and skill over both of them. He goes the distance with Wlad, but unlike the two said fighters, is actually able TO DO something during those 12 rounds.. Wlad would have the reach as well as some snap to his shots.. But Muhammad's speed, footwork, focus, precision jabbing and stamina to maintain a long workrate throughout a fight would be the deciding factor in the decision.. Again however, I maintain that he'd have to be at his very best to do it.. The Ali who dominated the 60's up to perhaps the first Frazier fight would have my vote... By the time he fought Foreman in 1974, he was relying on rope a dope tactics and outlasting his opponents rather than fronting the kind of work rate that he had shown years earlier, and this would not have been enough to turn the trick..

My thinking is that it would be a chess match that only the most ardent boxing fans could appreciate.. But to the novice fan who just wants to see an all out war with blood, brains and balls, it might be a disappointing affair.