If Wlad beats Haye he's an ATG

FFS man I'm telling you the way things are so you can stop this blinkered opinion you have.

If you're gonna contend this then please atleast do your research first.

edit: done it for you

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IBO_world_champions[/ame]

 

Wlad #1
Vitali #2
Haye #3
Adamek#4
Chagaev#5

Wlad will dispatch #3 this week, has already brutally dispatched #5 and Vitali will dispatch #4 later this summer.

So we have a two headed monster, what's wrong with that. Never in history has the HW division been soooooo dominated by 2 brothers to the point that we refuse to recognise either of them as the lineal titlist. WTF.

Just because these bros won't fight each other doesn't in the least take away from what they have accomplished. Which is to have thoroughly made excellent contenders with a vast array of styles look amateurish.

 

vitali holds the wbc belt when he retires wlad picks it up quite easily and he will have the wba belt saturday when he massacres haye

 

boxing has 1 champ.

that champ is wlad. If vitali wanted to contend it he'd have to fight him, which of course he would never do.

this is why wlad is the greater of the 2 brothers.

 

Wlad is already the Heavyweight Champion, he has the most belts & even the Ring recognizes him as the New Real Champion. :happy :smoke I win.

 

Everyone knows Wlad is the heavyweight champ. Just as we all know Sullivan was the heavyweight champ and Robinson was the welterweight champ.

 

However i've raised the issue over on classic so if someone more knowledgeable than me, not naysayer but a respectable poster, can convince me otherwise i might be back on this thread arguin with myself!

 

The way things are according to WHOM?

The Ring Magazine? The IBO? The WBA/BC or IBF?

Who gives a **** what they say?

They are all a ****ing joke and their "title" belts are MEANINGLESS...

 

you conveniently miss out bits of my post because it has no answer with your logic.

going by your system 1/2 has to beat 2/1:

sugar ray robinson is only welterweight champion for a couple of months.

Holmes is never a champion, or Gene Tunney took the championship lineage to his grave.

So your system of 1/2 has top beat 1/2 rewrites history.

your system of a championship not being retired rewrites history.

Do some research man.

the first ever champion, Sullivan. Never, I repeat NEVER faced Peter Jackson. If you are trying to claim he was never a champion then the heavyweight history we all know has a false starting point.

 

All arguing aside, it's nearly impossible to unify all the belts in any division, especially the Heavys where the money is usually largest. Too many ABC's to allow unification to happen. The fact that Wlad has gotten as far as he has is a testament to his greatness. That's the fact of the matter.

 

Maybe, but only at the bottom of the list of 200.:deal

 

The belts ratings are a joke, that much I'll give you. How Ray Austin was ever a mandatory or how Rahman is currently ranked so highly without fighting anyone of note shows how bad the current system is.

Povetkin should be unranked for his lack of fighting and so should Valuev.

 

which 200 heavyweights are greater than wlad?

 

You don't really expect an answer do you? :yep He'd have a hard enough time finding 20 that could be remotely considered better than Wladimir.

 

i think he's about number 15 based on dominance of his era.

sincle lewis retired (2004) he has rose to the top (2006) and legitimised his claim (2009). the decade is split between him and lewis with vitali having a minor interlude IMO