Can Wlad Break Joe Louiss Record Of 25 Title Defences? Manny Steward says he can!!

Beyond what Stoney and McGrain have already said about it, we don't know how many more title defenses Louis would have racked up without his extended WW II hiatus, or how many Ali would have generated without the three and a half exile imposed upon him in 1967, but both could well have reached 30 defenses of the undisputed championship, or even more. (Holmes winning 20 consecutive title bouts as an undefeated boxer over eight consecutive calendar years is also stunning.)

Since Wlad's here now, the desire that he be ranked alongside past ATG's is immediate, but history has a way of diluting stature once a competitor has departed the ring, and Steward can be full of it sometimes. (Did even Manny believe it when he claimed Lennox was the greatest heavyweight champion since Ali?) Three bad stoppage losses (especially to the vastly inferior 24-13-1 Puritty) doesn't help his all time case.

 

ATG stature is based on a champ's prime performances, and not on his mishaps before or after his prime.

 

i've never gotten use to the bros,watching them is like watching paint dry its work.

 

Yeah neither are very exciting.

I do appreciate Wlad's skillset though.

 

I tend to think that Wlad will not put up another ten title defences.

He might simply decide to get out of the game first.

If not, then he likley looses his title the way that most dominant champions loose it. That is to say unexpectedly.

One day he will meet a challenger, you likley decide not to stump up the pay per view, and you will wake up to the news that Wlad is no longer champion!

 

How many rights did Ibragimov land on Mitchell in just 2 rounds? I counted 4, two of which snapped Mitchell's head back. If that had been Vlad landing those rights, what do you think Mitchell's reaction would be?

Mitchell is going to fall hard...trust me...

 

I stand pretty firmly on the position that The Ring was wrong to make this allowance. Fans deserve the two best duking it out -not the best vs. the third best because there would always be a question about the second best and allowing that may put the wrong guy on the throne.

But, I'm open to what circumstances would allow it. Brothers behaving unnaturally doesn't cut it for me.

 

Vitali is on record saying he doesn't challenge wlad's position.

It really can't get clearer than that.

Plenty of champions throughout history filled a vacant throne without having a consensus 1 v 2 showdown.

Wlad beat the number 1 ranked hw in byrd anyways.

 

(Luf is cool. He's going to let me raise a ruckus now.)

He's DOMINATING? WHAT? --A weak field of my fellow Americans who train at McDonald's. He hasn't fought the one guy who could beat him!

He's made 11 defenses? Of what?!? These idiotic organizations are run by imbeciles who live in a make-pretend world and still they've managed to dupe the whole boxing world.

And Vitali's being a dutiful son and making mommy happy by conceding the throne doesn't-mean- DINK! I wish those two could be more like any number of siblings in 10th century Byzantium or any urban neighborhood!

If Wlad fought Vitali and Vitali defeated him, then it's Vitali that would deserve all the accolades, yes? Do you know that Wlad would beat Vitali? Nope. Neither do I.

And that's the problem here.

 

I agree with you. The Ring belt had to go to one of the brothers, and Vlad's accomplishments give him a slight edge on Vitali (discounting their respective performances against Sanders).

It's not realistic to expect that the brothers fight each other, or to keep The Ring belt vacant on the grounds that in this era, #1 and #2 can't fight each other.

 

Oh yes there is.

 

Pray tell.

 

Oh? Tell me who...