Did the Klitschkos have an easy time after Lewis retire or not?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Boxing2019, Sep 5, 2019.


  1. Boxing2019

    Boxing2019 If you want peace, prepare war. banned Full Member

    7,175
    5,448
    Jul 22, 2019
    Was truely low the competition in the HWs when the Klitschkos ruled or not? For me they were very great fighters but the competition after Lewis retire was not high. For you?
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2019
  2. BoxingDialogue

    BoxingDialogue Active Member Full Member

    835
    1,549
    Apr 26, 2019
    No doubt it was widely regarded as the worst heavyweight era in boxing history.
     
    HerolGee and Brixton Bomber like this.
  3. Boxing2019

    Boxing2019 If you want peace, prepare war. banned Full Member

    7,175
    5,448
    Jul 22, 2019
    The reasons for you?
     
  4. Momus

    Momus Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,732
    2,571
    Nov 27, 2010
    There generally needs to be a reasonable passage of time to determine the strength of an era, but even at this point it's safe to say that the immediate period following Lewis' retirement was unusually weak.

    Fighters who were beaten several times during the Lewis era like Maskaev and Briggs were able to win titles at an advanced stage of their careers. With a bit more luck you could throw Golota in there as well. Naturally smaller fighters like Byrd and Toney were at the top of the pile, and the likes of Brock and Barrett were top 10. The 2000 Olympic SHWs appeared to be unusually weak, with few fighters making much of an impact as pros.

    Where you have fighters moving up the ranks later in their careers without any obvious reason to think they improved as fighters, it's a good sign that the division is weak. A strong division usually has new blood building on top of the established guard, rather than the other way round.

    I think things picked up in quality by the end of the decade, with the emergence of Povetkin, Chagaev, Ibragimov and Haye, below the Klitschkos. That isn't a bad top 6 by any stretch, even if that mix didn't deliver many compelling fights.

    In Wlad's case, he reigned so long and beat so many challengers that you have to give him his props. The odds of lucking out with a weak era become less plausible when you hold the belt for a decade.
     
    Brixton Bomber likes this.
  5. The Funny Man 7

    The Funny Man 7 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,867
    2,045
    Apr 1, 2005
    I don't agree it was the worst era ever. I think the worst era ever was post-Marciano retirement. You had some pretty dismal names in the Top 10 for a while there. There have probably been other worse eras that aren't jumping to mind.

    A big part of why the landscape was so bleak when Lennox retired was that promotional issues prevented the K brothers from mixing it up with the heavyweights that were actually legit. Love them or hate them, John Ruiz, James Toney, & Chris Byrd were all better than 'Hurricaine' Jackson, but Byrd we didn't see any of them fight a Klitschko in 2004, when it would have counted for the most.

    Instead we got pointless fights like Tony vs Rydell Booker, Byrd vs. TOS Williamson, and Vitali vs. Williams. Eventually the Don King aligned fighters started getting shuffled out of the deck and you saw guys like Sam Peter and Calvin Brock emerge
     
  6. Eggman

    Eggman "The cream of the crop! Nobody does it better! Full Member

    4,332
    3,778
    Dec 2, 2015
    Awful era, slave contracts. Beat me, then you fight my brother and if you beat him you must rematch me again!!!!

    Absolute joke
     
  7. THE BLADE 2

    THE BLADE 2 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,660
    4,390
    Jul 14, 2009
    Must be the worst era in heavyweight history
     
  8. Fergy

    Fergy Walking Dead Full Member

    29,272
    35,702
    Jan 8, 2017
    Was a baaad Era.
     
  9. HerolGee

    HerolGee Loyal Member banned Full Member

    41,974
    4,028
    Sep 22, 2010
    when theres no doubt, theres no reason against it.