Ali vs Wlad/Lewis/Vitali... how does he win?

Exuses are made for all of those fighters. Margarito was 15. Pacman was Bantamweight & pre-roach. Hopkins it was his 1st fight.

None of these guys looked good before their first losses.

There is no exuse for getting KO'd in your 44th and 46th pro fights. After already looking good.

Just stfu there's no grounds to say anything. Wlad got ****ed up 3 times well into his career and will get ****ed up again.

He was **** and will always be ****. He's never faught anybody.

Name a fighter he's beat. Then watch me laugh as you name some C level chump nobodies heard of and will never go in the record books.

into his 50's in terms of fights and still never beat a real fighter.

"But there's never been anyone!"

Fair enough if he's undeafeted. Then nobody has grounds what to make of him. But he has and this he sucks a big horse dick, as do you.

You suck and so does your mother. Go.

 

Bhops lost in his 1st fight, Pac & Margo turned Pro in thier teens.

As for Frazier he KTFO by Gold Medalist and ATG George Foreman, that my friend is quite different from being KTFO a 37 yr old golfer who wasn't even in shape, or from falling apart against a very limited and getting KTFO by Brewster.

 

Grasping at straws.

You talk as if Brewster was some big name heavyweight

Brewster was a pile of **** and always has been. Wlad should never have lost in the first place. Was a shot peice of **** by the second Wlad fight.
Mixing insults with fact will get you somewhere. But all you're doing at the moment is showing how big the pool of wlads semen is in your eye socket.

:rofl

 

None of Ali's losses were as bad as Wlad, none of them came in his prime and 3 of them came when he was shot. His losses to Frazier and Norton are no where near as bad as Wlad's losses

 

maybe if you got off your knees and took Wlad's dick out your mouth this wouldn't be so hard for you to understand that Wlad is NOT unbeatable.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl

That doesn't make any sence. Ali was shot by then. Wladimir just never has been **** and never will be.

Fighters get shot at different times in their careers but what they dont do is go from being a ***** who gets KTFO by bums three times to some superstar that could beat people like Ali and Tyson in 4 years and well into their 30's.

YOUR A JOKE LIKE WLAD. FACE IT.

Write your **** little insulting posts and claim somebody is wrong without without actually debunking or replying to what they say.

You're a classic forum ******. It's not us bro, it's you. We are debunking your bull**** and you just come back with insults.

YOU'RE ****

You're nothing but a regular ESB ***** that cant take it when they get shown up to have no knowledge of the sport.

What are your grounds for saying Wlad could beat Ali. Wins over fat chagaev soviet bum? Wins over fat old Rahman?

Guy aint beat ****.

 

A taller fighter tends to punch down towards a shorter fighter which makes them open to punches coming over the top of their own arms if they stay in pocket. Lewis sometimes made this mistake and Wlad still does, a prime example of this was against Peter, you don't necessarily need to get past their guard, go on the inside or push them against the ropes. If Wlad threw his left lab, straight right one two against Ali, then Ali would simply step to his left and throw back over the top of Wlads punches before Wlad had chance to move out of range. Ali's speed, lateral movement and footwork would totally nullify Wlads size and he would counter punch Wlad at will.

 

I see a pattern in style here.

And I notice you responded to my afterthought but ignored the main post.

On the contrary, I did just that. And a number of other posters did too. And took from it the same conclusion that I did. In this case, what was in your mind and what you actually typed are two diffrent things.

Sure, your points are a little more developed and less is left out in THIS post, but the one to which I responded had, as it's central theme, that size is the main determinant.

No. Size had little to do with it. What counted more was REACH, and even more, SPEED.

First, Wlad is 6'6.5" and usually fights just over 240. And regardless, this does not remove Ali's jab advantage at all.

Ali's measured reach is about 3'' (or 4%) shorter than Wlad's, but Ali 'reached' further than Wlad because of the way he leaned forward while throwing the jab ( and also, contrary to orthodox boxing wisdom, pulled straight back to avoid his opponents shots, both jabs and powershots).

In short, Ali would have little trouble 'finding a home for his jab.'

There are no fighters in today's age that are REMOTELY close to Ali in terms of mobility. Wlad would not be lining him up for the right because Ali would be far too mobile.

I'm having trouble believing you ever saw Terrell fight, other than against Ali, who made many look clumsy.

Was Terrell clumsy against the very sharp Doug Jones ?

Or Eddie Machen?

Terrell was an accomplished, and skilled fighter.

It was on display for most of the fight. Ali was well ahead by the time of stoppage. He landed by far the most significant headshots throughout the fight.

You need to re-watch the Rumble.

It wasn't just a rope-a-dope. He was landing frequent hard headshots, right on the money. It was a combination of this breaking down of Foreman and Foreman's inefficient exertion and body attack that wore down big George.

Ali came out to finish George in round 5, realized he wasn't quite done, and so went back to his strategy for another three rounds, before delivering the coup.

Perhaps George wasn't, but Norton was technically as good and probably better than Wlad. And much more willing to attack.

He is technically very sound, if a little stiff, but he's about
4% taller and 10% heavier than Ali.

And while he is swift for a man that size, in absolute terms Ali was much swifter of both hand and foot, and vastly more fluid and imaginative in the ring.

Terell has no business being clumped in with Valuev and Long.

It definitely does matter. I've never disputed that. But it is FAR from the most significant determinant. If all else were equal, Wlad would be favoured. But, as I've mentioned, all else is no where close to equal.

I've already explained why this is NOT the case.

Again, no. and I've already explained why not.

No. You're mixing up relative speed (i.e. Wlad is fast FOR A GUY THAT SIZE) with absolute speed. Wlad would not be the fastest Ali had seen. He would be less mobile around the ring than at least half the fighters Ali faced in his prime, and he would have less hand speed than Floyd Patterson, Jimmy Young, Joe Bugner to name a few.

You'd probably lose that bet.

Who argues that Wlad's not fast. But agile? That's stretching it. The one area where he needs to improve is mobility.

I don't need to read. I've seen most of the major fights since 1965 as they happened.


And I haven't even touched on Ali's stamina vs Wlads. (That would be like comparing Tyson's power with Byrd's)

Nor have I mentioned Ali's superior heart and mental toughness, nor his pre-fight mind games.



Wlad could win this one, and he could and would give Ali pause for a few rounds due to his size and style, but Ali takes this 9 times out of 10, and most of them are by stoppage.




For the record, I am a big fan of Wlad and an even bigger fan of Vitali, and these lads would be competitive in any era since I have been following the sport.

Ali would have a tougher time with Vitali than Wlad.



However, there is too much of a natural skill and talent gap here for Wlad to overcome.

 

I guess I just dont get PugilisticPowers problem, I tried using facts in my posts and he ends up calling me names and tries to degrade me, just because I do not agree with his opinion. And judging by 90% of other posters, he's clearly in the minority in his way of thinking.

I think Wlad is a very talented Heavyweight, but if you look at his toughest matches, he folded under the pressure more than he came out victorious. Ali on the other hand fought with a broken jaw against Norten, dead tired in his match against Frazier the 3rd time around, was caught with a huge hook by Frazier in the first fight, but he got right up to finish the fight. Wlad just dont have that type of toughness, and he has proven it time and time again.

 

He's an angry german kid that's why.

A Pathetic individual who can't take it when somebody else has a conflicting view with his own.

10 pages in and still nobody has agreed with him.

You know when you suck when??

Give up Pugilist, you're a little gimp. Nobody likes you or agrees with what you have to say.

Give it a rest. You got debunked harsh.

 

Wlad needs to get brutally knocked the **** out to bring his fans back to earth....i dont like vitali, but i have much more respect for him as a fighter then i do wlad.....i think that man would be a tough out for anybody in history.....but wlad? **** NO!