Haye vs Klitschko off?

So that's a no? You can't name 10 fighters with better resumees than Wlad?
1) more KOs in world title fights than Wlad AND 2) more world title fights won than Wlad AND 3) more KOed opponents than Wlad AND 4) more opponents beaten than Wlad?

I am talking about real heavyweight here (200+ opponents).

Come on, I ask you once more. And you know what? I lower my expectations. Get me ONLY 5 (FIVE) other heavies with only 2 (TWO) of the above 4 features.

If you can't deliver 5 boxers with better resumees than Wlad than stop complaining about Wlad.

And stop INSULTING. Start DELIVERING. And spare me this nonsense about "70ies opponents were SOOO much better than nowadays opponents".

 

My opinion is also that Klitchko is avoiding the fight

 

Aah, you know some famous boxers. Good for you.

But FAIL. This is NOT what I asked for. I didn't ask for famous boxers.

I asked for 5 boxers who have a better resumee than Wlad in 2 of 4 categories.

1. Lennox Lewis: Beats Wlad only in 1 of the 4 categories (world titles won)
2. George Foreman: Yup, beats Wlad in 2 categories
3. Mike Tyson: Beats Wlad on 0 of the 4 categories
4. Joe Frazier: Beats Wlad on 0 of the 4 categories
5. Muhammad Ali: Nope, beats Wlad only in 1 of the 4 category (world titles won)
6. Evander Holyfield: Beats Wlad on 0 of the 4 categories
7. Riddick Bowe: Beats Wlad on 0 of the 4 categories
8. Joe Louis: Beats Wlad on 0 of the 4 categories
9. Jack Dempsey: Beats Wlad on 0 of the 4 categories. That you list Dempsey here shows that you have no clue. Dempsey's median 200+ opponent was 0-3-0. Dempsey won only 3 times against non-bums.
10. Rocky Marciano: Yeah, sure, with only 12 heavyweight fights (opponents 200+) he surely is a valid comparison to Wlad. Beats Wlad on 0 of the 4 categories.

FAIL. You delivered only 1 example so far. And that is George Foreman. Foreman has more 200+ KOs than Wlad (54 to 46) AND more wins (52 to 60). The median weight of Foreman's KO opponents is 215. Wlad's is 233. Moreover his KOed opponents are more bummy than Klitschko's. So even in these 2 categories Wlad is actually better than Foreman. But I give you that.

Come on try harder. You still have to find 4 more boxers. So far you only copy+pasted some famous names.

The boxers don't have to be over 200. But their opponents.
Because we are talking about REAL HEAVYWEIGHT HERE. Not some wins like Ali vs Foster (180 lbs) or Marciano vs Edwards (173).
You know exactly that such wins are completely meaningless to be compared to Klitschko.

You have no right to call me moron when you didn't even find 2 boxers so far with a better resumee than Klitschko.

Says who? The page where you have copy+paste'd the names from?

 

This is too much. Not that I wish to dignify your moronic, twisted logic, but Wlad has never fought in a proper world title fight, he has fought for crappy paper titles they mean ****. The rest of those fighters were undisputed/linear or had the title when there was only one.

Furthermore, Corrie Sanders and Ross Purrity say so.

 

What is this all about?

It's about becoming THE heavyweight champion and who you fought to do it.

Wins for one particular title, how many guys you KO'd, its not relevent. They look very nice, and yes they show you are a good fighter, but becoming the champion is the key and surpasses any trivial statistic.

 

That's a rather simplistic approach don't you think? It's not a numbers game.

 

**** your categories. A better resume means better opponents, and all 10 of those guys on that list fought better opponents than Waldo. :deal "World titles" and ****ing "number of KO's"? Get the **** outta here, dumbass.

 

Not that your statisticks arent ******ed, but Bowe, Holyfield and Tyson have all won more world heavyweight titles than Wladimir.:deal

Holyfield 8 (without counting cruiserweights)
Tyson 5
Bowe 4 (If you count WBogus )
Wladimir 3 (If you count WBogus )

 

More importantly the number of linear titles held by those fighters is thus-

Holyfield 2
Tyson 1
Bowe 1
Wlad 0

 

This content is protected

 

I have to say that I disagree with almost everything you stated. You obviously are a fan of Haye.

First of all, I want the Haye-Waldo fight to happen as I think it could bring back some excitement to the division.

Then, I have to admit it that it is hard to keep any faith in Haye right now. He could have fought the likes of Toney or Rahman in his first bout but he elected to face a total bum in Barett. Then, very surprisingly he founds himself in negotiations with a much tougher opponent than Toney or Rahman in Waldo. Yet, now again the fight does not seem to come off.

Finally, it is Haye who has to concede considerably more during the negotiations, yet he does not seem to willing to do that. Remember, Waldo is the champ and Haye is not. Haye has not beaten anyone in the heavyweight divisions so he should be lucky to get a shot. Haye is not a HOF and has not a great resume outside the heavyweight division. You compare Haye to Holyfield but Haye's only name in his record is Mormeck.

 

It's the statistical resumee.

 

So what's your inference?

 

This content is protected