How Harmful Will Wladimir Klitschko's Unavenged...

Wlad is top 25 ATG currently, there is pretty much no way he will ever crack the top 10, 3 losses against practical nobodies at the time doesnt help either. Purrity had almost as many losses as he does wins, Brewster was 13 months inactive and already lost to Shufford and Eitenne, Sanders was not ranked in the top 10 at the time and was most remembered for his knockout losses to Rahamn and Tubbs, a ton of other fighters were called, all of them declined to go to Germany and fight Wlad in 03, Sanders was the only fighter on the list to accept the invitation, the rest is history.

Wlad is currently fighting in one of the weakest Heavyweight divisions in the history of boxing, and still seems to have trouble looking good against aggressive fighters like Sam Peter in 05, who made him panic and hold a number of times, 97 to be exact. Wlad's chin and mental toughness is very weak, which contributes to his 11 knockdowns and 3 TKO's, which were mostly against journeymen.

I see Wlad cracking the top 20, with his physical attributes alone, it's just too bad Wlads prime wasnt in the 90's, his very weak chin and pysche would of been target practice for alot of the greats and good fighters that fought during that era.

 

Sanders and Purrity both have assets well outside their general level, in a legendary chin and ungodly power.

Misleading to paint them in such a simple light.

 

Other than Wlad, who was Sanders best win? Purrity had not even a medicore win in his whole career, aside from Wlad. Brewster is the fighter that showed any type of skill and or staying power after Wlad lost to him in April of 04, Brewster went on to beat Meheen in a very close match, then killed Golota in under 60 seconds, then knocked out Luan Krasniqi late in the fight after losing on all cards by many points in Germany, and then his epic loss against Liakhovich in April of 06, Brewster did hold the WBO title for 2 years.

How am I painting them in a misleading light? Ones an out of shape golfer who has quick powerful hands, but lacked dedication, Purrity is nothing more than a club fighter who has nearly as many wins as he does losses, what is there more to say?

 

C'mon Suzie,

While I agree that Golata fought dirty and this was clearly a past prime Bowe, this was hardly your position in the past.

A few weeks ago, ( prior to your enlightening meeting with Bowe ,) we had a thread comparing Marciano to Bowe in a head to head matchup. You clearly commented on Bowe being thrashed by Golata, and now you're making it sound as though it was nothing more than foul play on the other man's part.

Please be consistant for once.......

 

You are young. All you have is the web-based yearly ranking of Steve Farhood's jack-off rag.

The fact remains that Sanders was routinely ranked in the top-ten of their monthly rag, which I received and submitted to and got published in.

What? Alexander Zolkin or Bruce Seldon or Joe Hipp are better fighters than Sanders? Maybe you want to ask Don King why he wanted to throw millions at Sanders late in his career and even called him the biggest waste of potential revenue in the game?

I hate to sound like the ol' Vietnam vet, but "I was there". Sanders was really ****ing good and no one wanted part of him.

 

Ridiculous Bowe barely made it past Pierre Coetzer in their fight. He had to low blow him to hell and back to even gain purchase in that fight. It was hardly an emphatic performance.

He qualifies as a flash in the pan.

 

Ya Well I changed my opinion of the fights once I heard the whole story of the fights from an inside source. film does not tell everything. Golota is a ******.

 

Dude I was there too, I was in high school when Sanders was fighting wlad. I collected ring magazine monthly issues too during that time as a teenage hobby. Sanders had a big punch and he was a southpaw, so he was a bit of a high risk low reward because he was such an unheralded unskiled fighter, but I dont remember any of my articles ever stating the divisions best ducking a unproven fighter like himself, especially after he got dismantled by hasim rahman. Going into the wlad fight, he had no shot, everyone thought it was a joke a old flabby man like him even got a shot vs wlad, and that it would end in a massacre. Sanders shocked the world, he was a journeyman one hit wonder pure and simple. People hype up sanders in head to head matchups to take away from the embarrasement for wlad.


ps Fact Remains Sanders was not on ONE single issue of Annuel Ring Magazine Ratings up until beating wlad, thats a fact. call them bias if you want, but they put in more stock than monthly ratings. Anyone could be rated for a month, but its what you do for the whole year that counts. Sanders was simply put a journeyman for 7/8 of his career.

 

This is all fine and dandy, but unless we're talking about an H2H list, most of it is irrelevant. Nobody's arguing that WK doesn't match up well vs. other greats in an H2H manner (or at least, they shouldn't), but his career does not fare so well.

Additionally, some things, such winning percentage, are almost totally irrelevant IMO. Someone like Frazier, who fought Ali 3x and Foreman 2x, may have a lower winning percentage than Wladimir, but certainly beat much better competition otherwise.

Knockout percentage is another semi-bogus statistic. Knocking someone out isn't synonomous with total domination, just as it isn't always better than outpointing a guy. It's somewhat useful in ranking someone as a puncher and/or finisher but we have to keep in mind that sometimes the better win comes from a clean shutout.

What makes me extremely hesitant to rank Wladimir inside my top 20 or 25 is not that his losses are "unavenged". It's the timing of them - all three of them (to a lesser extent the Purrity fiasco) came when he was considered by many to be either the concensus #1 contender or the #1 man/champion himself. One can argue that he wasn't "mature enough" or "in shape", but the fact is that he was roughly 27 and 28 for the Sanders and Brewster defeats. He was fully mature and came ready to fight both times - the "flukes" in these fights were not that he underestimated his opponent, undertrained, and got coldcocked (see Lewis-Rahman I), but that he was simply knocked out and owned by guys that really aren't/weren't all that good. This is without bringing up the Peter debacle, too.

Lennox Lewis has KO losses that bookend his prime. Wladimir Klitschko has two of them in what seems to be the middle of his.

 

Ok, you were in high school in 2003. I was being PAID (not much) to cover a Sanders fight in 93 or so. Big difference. I interviewed Don King twice and was routinely within feet of him (not that you could believe anything he said). Those annual issues are bull****, as is the magazine in general during the Farhood era. Fact is, Sanders was ranked routinely by all four bodies and no one wanted a part of him. That is the reality of the game as it was. You may do your web-search for the ring annual ratings (not hard to find) and take it to heart. Take it from someone who had access to the inside of the early, mid and some of the late nineties, Sanders was the real deal and the measure of most the champs of the last 15 years.

Please tell me I do not know what I know firsthand.

 

Not to mention he cries foul play when Cleveland Williams is unranked in the 50's because of bad rankings and all that, but when a Seldon is ranked and not Sanders, the rankings are gospel.

Let's face it guys, the only way to set this straight is we can sign a petition for Sanders to visit SuzieQ at his gym and we'll be flooded with "Sanders can still be undisputed champ if he gets in shape!" threads.

 

Speaking of Big Cat, Chris Pontius tried in another thread Cleveland Williams was knocked out by Ernie Terell

 

Neither here nor there, but I have the June 2003 issue of The Ring, which would have been the last issue previous to Wladimir's fight with Corrie Sanders, and Sanders is no where to be found in their monthly top ten ranking for the period ending Feb 11th, 2003;

Champ: Lennox Lewis

1: Wladimir Klitschko
2: Chris Byrd
3: David Tua
4: Evander Holyfield
5: John Ruiz
6: Hasim Rahman
7: Vitali Klitschko
8: Kirk Johnson
9: Mike Tyson
10: Jameel McCline


Not so strange, I guess, but that issue of The Ring also includes the ratings for the three main alphabet groups, and Sanders is no where to be found in the WBA's top 12, IBF's top 12, nor the WBC's top 30. Entirely possible that he's listed in the WBO's ranking for that time, but this magazine doesn't list it, so I can't say one way or the other.

Like Seamus, though, I think I do remember a brief appearance by Sanders in The Ring's monthly rankings during the early part of the previous decade, although I'm not sure I can confirm that (I have saved some issues from the late 80's/early 90's, but not many and until recent years, none past 1992, I don't think) Shouldn't matter much, though, as that would have been ten years previous to the Klitschko fight.

 

Thanx Sam, I wish you would post here more often. You have alot of information to give to this forum, but unlike many posteres here you have the right attitude too.


It appears Seamus was wrong even about sanders being in the monthly ratings prior to wlad fight. Hey Seamus what low level college did you get your degree of "Journalism" from?