My guess is that he will be an ATG, assuming he goes undefeated for another 2-3 years, racking up defenses and at least unifying 2 of the 3 other belts...but he probably won't be remembered as such until after he retires, much like Lennox Lewis. It's almost an insult to even mention most currently active fighters as ATG's to many people, but once that fighter retires, everyone looks at the next guy in line- and that's when it'll hit them that hey, maybe the last guy was great after all. Right now alot of people are waiting for Wlad to fail (again, just like with Lewis)....if he retires without losing again, those same people are going to finally look at the entire body of work and realize he was a hell of a heavyweight.
It's ironic that Norton and Patterson are your examples, because those are the guys to me that one could argue Wlad ranks higher than right now. Norton and Patterson were worse at taking punches than Wlad is. I say that with all due respect to both guys, as I'm a fan of Patterson's as well, but it's a double standard when other people have KO losses not held against them. It can't go both ways- either the losses get held against everybody the way they do for Wlad, or you have to look at the context of every loss for everybody the way you're doing for the "classic" fighters. I personally lean towards the latter because I'd rather focus on what the fighter did in their entire 40+ fight career as opposed to ignoring the entire body of work to simply to focus on a couple of losses. The losses carry weight; but it's pretty haterish to hold the new fighters to that much of a higher standard. It should be equal footing for everyone.
i deliberately chose those examples because they are the most vulnerables one for one to say wlad ranks higher. did you mean to say you lean towards "former" and not "latter"? the "latter" in your context was my method too. look at the loss in the context (not excuse). losing to sonny liston during an undisputed championship belt is one thing - losing to corey sanders is something completely different IMO. if you think i hold double standards againt klitschkos- i dont hold much against vitali for his loss against lennox (if anything i see it in VERY positive light for vitali because it proved a lot of good things about him). those losses say something about a fighter. isn't lennox lewis suffering so much bashing for life because of his two losses (which weren't nearly as poor as wlad's). in lewis' case, it shows that he doesn't have a granite chin. in wlad's case, it says his chin is average or below but more so - if his chin can't help him, he doesn't make up for it with survival skills or ability to rally while hurt like holmes. can this be later changed? absolutely. but we're going to have to see a LOT to define a change. now, wlad is 11 years into his career? how many fighters in history have been able to make such a turn around? none that i can think of. theoretically it is possible for wlad - practically the chances are very little IMO (whereas you proly have more optimistic expections). i think wlad fans try to lower the standars for him to be top 20 (just beating 3 contenders in one era is not enough as some claim - there were LOTS of contenders you and i don't know about that had 3 great wins over good contenders but we don't hear of them because top 20 is not a joke it is not easy to make that list. there are high standards for them. 1. ali 2. louis 3. liston 4. holmes 5. foreman 6. dempsey 7. frazier 8. marciano 9. holyfield 10. lennox lewis 11. mike tyson 12. riddick bowe 13. jack johnson 14. jim jeffries 15. max baer 16. gene tunney 17. max schmelling 18. jesse willard 19. floyd patterson (i feel guilty about keeping him so low just because a lot of those guy above would beat him head to head - his achievments, abilities, and regaining the title make him immortal) 20. ken norton That is a pretty filled up list right there. I can't justify taking out an of those guys and IMO that is a very distinguished crowd right there. Guys like Vitali, Buster Douglas (yes, even he!), Ingo, etc. have higher priority of claim to hte list than Wlad.
atsch you do realize your list could be ripped apart dont you ? You are aware that guys like SONNEY defended titles just one time against 180 pounders right ? GEORGE defended against who again ? DEMPSEY took how long betweeen defences ? ect ect ! you seem to insinuate VLAD must do much more then anyone else to get accepted as an all time great ! PS LARRY fought the most pathetic bunch of contenders of all ! :deal your to smart to make these rediculous claims HOB ! :bbb
