How Many Previous Champs Does Wlad Beat?

=dinovelvet;16725768]You're just telling me what it says on boxrec, not what happened in the ring.

Wlad won 2 rounds of that fight. A fight is is 12 rounds. After the 2nd

He won the fight, technicality or not.. If someone you liked won via technical decision due to a cut stoppage, you'd back him life and death. Care to comment on Shavers getting knocked out by ron stander or schooled by Bob stallings? How about Pinklon Thomas getting outboxed by an aged Berbick and being washed up at age 29?

Yeah kinda like the way you comment on the 3 or 4 bad performances that Wlad's had in a career of nearly 70 bouts like a broken record.

 

Did you watch Wlad beat Williamson? The answer is no because if you watch the fight you will see Williamson beating Wlad.
Listen to Sleep in this video from 3:12 mins on.

Everything he says is right on the money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vq8zQEmCjic

Because he refused the rematch and never fought a guy like him again.
Were talking Williamson here ffs. Not the likes of Foreman. The levels. Wlad is clearly a couple of tiers bellow.

 

Manny Steward claimed that (prior to Vitali) Lewis was in the best condition since Holyfield I. A similar amount of graft may have been put in; an older body simply didn't respond as well.

Regarding Wlad's chances against the best, Lewis has always struck me as a good antidote. He had a certain tenacity which would rattle him. Wlad would flinch more than jab because he knows he doesn't have control of the situation, and then he'd lose.

Many of the early, smaller champions would have a tough time against Wlad. Many would get pole-axed.

For my money Dempsey would flatten Wlad. Everything that set up that pulverising KO of Pulev was the antithesis of Jack - no awareness after the break, chin up in the air. The young Dempsey's movement would foil Wlad's straight punches, plus had the rare ability to press while slipping, and his quick hooks had a steep trajectory.

Johnson could win. It wouldn't be easy.

Louis should be favoured. Subtle footwork would sneak him into range before detonating.

Difficult to see Marciano doing well. Can't discount him, partly because it's hard to envisage, but the proportions and styles paint a bloody picture.

I would favour Liston, Ali, Frazier (less so), Foreman, Holmes, Tyson and Holyfield to win. May seem harsh but they all had a resourcefulness that I don't see in Wlad when threatened by somebody who has the goods.

He's starting to pound out my scepticism, but there's still a distinct line between the greatness displayed over poor-fair opposition and the greatness within.

 

a guy who gets regular beat by journeymen and retirees isn't going to do well against h2h vs atgs.


wlads best chance are the weakest ones around 15-20 ranked, any ATG with good skills and a hard punch is going to poleaxe him fast if a fatboy retiree did it in seconds and wald was unable to prove it wasn't the norm by rematching him.

 

So, Dempsey was regularly beat by Meehan, Johnson poleaxed by Choynski, Louis by an over the hill Schmeling, Marciano beat almost nothing but retirees, Liston chopped down by a light heavy, Ali dropped by Banks, Cooper, Frazier, Wepner, broken jaw to Norton…, Holmes dropped by several right hands… the list goes on and on.

Waldo has controlled the division for 8 or so years. He has barely lost a round in that time and has fought regularly.

He is an ATG. Get over it.

 

cleaerly you didn't read my post. read it next time and reply to it, don't invent your own post for me.

what I cant get over is you not reading posts before replying - that's the issue here.

also wondering why you are asking me to get over a point that I accept already since I see Wlad as a borderline atg anyway - clearly you are butthurt much to respond so irrelevantly.

 

Bet welching ***.

 

Nearly a decade previously he was just 5 pounds shy of 256 for the McCall rematch.

It would be correct to call it his career heaviest, but that doesn't necessarily equate with "fat" or "overweight."

At 36 years of age, Wlad came in at his career heaviest as well for the second Thompson fight.

 

I tried to make the best of your post that I could. Who is "a guy who gets regular beat by journeymen and retirees"? Wlad? In 70 fights he got beat by 3 guys, right? That is regular? He goes ten years without a defeat (longer than guys like Marciano even had a career), fighting almost exclusively against top contenders, and he still gets beat "regular" by journeymen?

Maybe you are the one who needs to clarify here.

 

Don't cry here ! The 37 (nearly 38 years old slow,fat,tired Lewis knocked Vitali k out.
The prime vitali k. went only 6 rounds with the out of shape
Lennox.
It was a weak performance by the prime vitali klitschko considering
McCall and Rahman destroyed a better,younger Lewis.
Vitali klitschko was lame.That's all.
The rematch ? The rematch can't change the result of the first fight .

 

its not regular for an ATG champ to get beat by retiree/journeymen repeatedly without attempting to prove the result was a fluke.

IN FACT THIS FEATURE IS UNIQUE TO WLAD as an atg champ.

no I don't, it says what it says.

in contrast you mentioned a string of atgs who won the fights you mentioned OR in a few cases they lost, were not fighting journeymen/retirees and they rematched and won pretty clearly.

It is YOU who is way off mark. Please post a message that meets the directives of my post if you want to reply to it,.


NOW, try again.

 

mind you vitali was a nobody back then so it was a good performance for such a nobody back then.

whereas today in retrospect it was a poor performance by vits, or a reflection on how low boxing has sunk since lewis left.

 

Yeah the rematch that Lewis said he'd take yet like a yellow belly curred out, Lewis was a great fighter by the way but took the easy way out, can't blame him though.

 

Again, a guy who goes ten years and 20 fights without a defeat, fighting almost exclusively highly ranked opponents is someone who loses "regular" to journeymen and retirees?

Are you going to stand by that assertion?

 

I can only count 2 decent opponents he has defended against since then, perhaps 3 at a push.

ie. almost exclusively NOT against good opposition.

You are proving the opposite of what you intend.