Contrast Holmes' reign with Klitschko's.

Going by this rationale - Zolt Erdei is one of the greatest 175 pounders of all time.

But in reality , he's not in the top 25.

Wlads reign is shallow and he needed to bend the rule book to get decisions.

He won't ever be greater than Holmes .

 

PS - there is no shame in a post prime Holmes getting demolished by a PRIME Tyson. Mike would have done the same to an in-his-prime Grabbamir...

 

Pre prime is counter acted by Snaders being shot and never that good to begin with.

Same with Brewster.

 

:deal

And lets not forget his tag-team partner Vitali who beat the guys who beat up on Grabbamir....

 

How about we compare apples to apples?

While "pre-prime" Grabbamir was getting demolished by the likes of Purrity and Sanders, Holmes was beating guys like Shavers and Norton.

Homes >>> Wlad

and it really isn't even close...

 

:nod

 

What in the hell does Lennox Lewis have to do with Grabbamir Klitschko?

Lewis avenged his losses. Klitschko didn't. Period, end of...

Lewis >>> Klitschko

 

Lewis immediately rematched the Rahman loss.

Wlad had no interest in going back in with Sanders who was beaten by Rahman.

That shows how weaker and diluted this era is.

 

In general, you rate a fighter after his victories rather than his defeats. Manny Pacquiao was by most seen as greater than Floyd Mayweather until Floyd fought him, even though Floyd was undefeated. Most would also agree that Bernard Hopkins is greater than Joe Calzaghe, even if Bernard racked up a few losses while Joe is 46-0.

Wladimir Klitschko is ahead of Larry Holmes in resume, and would slaughter him head to head. If Wladimir had lost on a more consistent basis, perhaps it would have been relevant for the debate, but he didn't.

 

He is Fury/Wilder wins away from top 5 atg (Wladimir that is). That will solidify his position as a H2H nightmare, since we already know he is good against short guys.

I've long ago stopped being his fan and can't really watch his fights anymore but you have to give him props. His reign > Holmes reign.

 

Wlad has lost three times after fighting over sixty times. Only people who lacks fundamental understanding for the sport thinks his career can be understood by looking at his losses.

 

do we dimminsh foreman not avenging ali or young or tyson should avenged his loss to buster douglas. it isnt the losses that count but going down and come back and keep moving foword, how you react to adversity is how champions are made

 

No.

Maybe you forgot but a fighter's resume counts wins and LOSSES.

The only place where LOSSES don't count is PLANET KITSCHKO.

Holmes has the better resume. Period, end of...

 

Klitschko reigned longer, unified the belts and fought all his mando's

He would also destroy Larry Holmes in my opinion