How would Jerry Quarry...

He didnt beat BOWE andit was widely accepted that it was because of BOWES size ( who is smaller then either KLIT ) And he no success with LL ! Your point is again ?atsch

 

Cross, got to defend 2smart4u. At least he has plain logic & science on his side - not warm & fuzzy memories or outright predudice.

I'll tell you what's boring and beyond lame. It's the constant "HW bad today, Wlads chin, HW bad today, Wlads a robot" mantra from these clowns. And I'm not referring to you as one of the clowns either. You can disagree w/someone without acting like a 3 year old that hasn't had their nap. It's these trolls and blind posters that kept me from joining ESB for over 3 years. I had better material in grade school than most of these "adults". I'd bet at least half of them have never been in a real fist fight... but they're experts in pro boxers courage and chins :roll: :-(

Cross, you probably know this story. The term robot is usually a slur used against white boxers - although plenty of non white boxers are robotic. Didn't Jack Johnson & others use that term to describe Joe Louis? :rofl
I'm not going to research the word, but I don't think it was much used until the 20th century.

 

:rofl

Power? Check.

"Skill"? Check.

Now all you're missing is "He's bigger!" to complete the set.

 

well put:good But then again the size,power,and skill over power a little man like Holyfield. We should also factor heart into the fight, not even diehard Wlad fans can give him that notch.

 

I see your simply repetitive without retort ! Typical !:deal

 

2smart4u and the "Klitschko haters" are often two unfortunate sides of the same coin. They focus on one or two variables and completely ignore the rest because that's what they want to believe.

And I'd actually agree with Johnson's evaluation. Louis was robotic...but like Wlad (who is somewhat similar in this regard), he was an EXTREMELY good robot. It's not a slur, really--if you're a robotic fighter, you're also usually very precise.

 

You didn't have a point. How can I have a retort to a point that doesn't exist? :huh

You mentioned ONE technical aspect--hooking off the jab. Well, Holy did that too on occasion. All the rest was repetition of "He has skill! He has size! He has power!"

 

atsch Total bull**** ! I dont simply rely on a couple of variables at all ! you my friend ignore the obvious and its a tad bizzar ! And you drift on the side of the ROSE COLORED GLASS wearing groud more times then not ! You know when you see a cow you can simply assume its a cow ! I think you would want a long drawn out DNA test to convince you ! :yep Not nesessary for most !:hi:

 

Not a bad point. I'd give Holy the "heart" edge over Wlad.

But I'd also give Joe Frazier the heart edge over Foreman ! Didn't seem to help much there ! :!: :yep

 

If I identified animals like you analyze boxers, I would believe there were only three animals on earth.

 

atsch VLAD gets hit less ? VLAD koes more opponents ? VLAD loses less rounds ! And since you claim its not his size that is the cause of these stats maybe you would like to explain ! And dont use the HOLYS competion is better argument becasue that will be ripped apart also !:yep are these points easy enough for you !:bbb

 

True.

But, in his defense, Wlad does keep getting up whenever he's knocked down. He has a great deal of heart--it's just that his chin and confidence sometimes let him down, like Patterson.

 

Actually you could make an accurate accessment of most classified species of animals because of the knowlege base readily available ! the way you anialize things you wont even get past mammals !:yep :hi:

 

can we say balance issue ?:hi:

 

Foreman didn't get hit much in his prime either. Was he more skilled than Holyfield too?

Shavers must be the most skilled fighter EVER!

...And also hasn't beaten a great fighter like Tyson.

Wlad often faced opponents who lacked the firepower to exploit his technical weaknesses. His one-dimensional standing at range and firing jab/hook/rights at Byrd worked because Byrd lacked the inside fighting ability, the front-foot aggressive ability to get inside in the first place, and the power to make his shots count when he DID manage to penetrate. His standing-at-range style meshed perfectly with Wlad's tendencies. Purritty and Sanders, on the other hand, were able to exploit these problems.

The fact remains--Holyfield beat both Bowe and Tyson, who are considered two of the best in their era. Both are better than Byrd, who is Wlad's best win.

Too easy.