If Wlad's career ended today...

I'd rate Norton and Witherspoon over Wlad and in a fight I'd back Bonecrusher Smith to beat him. A guy with a decent chin and a KO shot always has a chance with Wlad.

 

You're right. His list of wins over the divison's best fighters over the past decade is rather slim, and I don't think anyone can refute that . For whatever its worth, he is the concencus best at the moment, and probably has been for the last 3 years. Time will tell what his stock value is worth.

 

Fair enough. I'm not sure that we'll ever see such a match, but it would certainly boost his legacy.

 

Yes, Vlad has fought the best available fighters of his generation. The only top guys he hasn't fought, he is eager to fight. There is no doubt about that.

Vlad needs a tough, defining fight to round out his resume. Unfortunately, he will probably never have such a match.

 

Okay, but who are the top ten heavyweights other than Wlad over the last ten years? How many has he fought? How many did he defeat?

 

Johnson didn't and neither did Jeffries. Not that i would rank Wlad near them, just saying. I could make a few comments about Jeffries' opposition here, but i don't want to change the subject.

 

I think the most important thing to focus on here, is that Wlad has beaten most of the best fighters that are currently available, except for Chagaev and Povetkin, one of whom he has already signed to fight. As for who he has beaten over the last 10 years, well we have to consider that he's only really been a titlist for a few years. Additionally, His never facing Lennox Lewis was largely due to the fact that Lewis never signed to fight him during the 3 years that Wlad was a ring ranked #1 contender. Therefore, it shouldn't be held against him for not fighting Lewis. I can however understand the criticism that he lost badly to Corrie Sanders whom he never avenged against. This will always be the stain on his resume. I don't hold the Purity or Brewster losses against him so badly, because he lost to one of them while being a work in progress and managed to avenge the other. The Sanders defeat, can't generate any excuses.

 

was norton ever flattened in his prime by a 38 year old journeyman? or knocked out in his prime by a man who was shutout by ettiene and shuford?


ps Jimmy Young Muhammad Ali are by far better heavyweights than anyone wlad has ever beaten. its not even close. Also dont forget his one point split decision to top 5 ATG larry holmes.

 

Like who? Ruiz, rahman, tua, ibeabuchi, holyfield, lennox, valuev, chagaev????

 

The point here is best available heavyweights...note the word "available." All the names on your list were not available to Vlad for one reason or another. Further, some of the names are clearly inferior to Vlad anyway, so there's no real point in discussing them.

Lewis retired before Vlad could fight him. Holyfield fell from the ratings just before Vlad became big, so Holyfield was no longer viable as a top opponent. Ibeabuchi was jailed before Vlad became big. Tua was not available for promotional/contractual reasons while he was in his prime, and after losing to Lewis and Byrd, he fell from the ratings. Rahman and Ruiz were Don King fighters (i.e., not available to fight the Klitschkos because King was afraid his guys would be beaten).

As for Chagaev and Valuev, Vlad is trying hard to nail down fights with them, and again Don King is getting in the way. Regardless, Chagaev and Valuev would not rate much of a chance against Vlad anyway.

 

Sanders was better than a mere "journeyman". He was really one of the division's 10 best heavies on a talent/ability basis all along, even though he wasn't actually rated when he fought Vlad.

But Sanders aside, I do agree that Norton had better career accomplishments than Vlad, and possibly should be rated over Vlad on an all-time basis. It's arguable, either way.

 

Brewster was far below his best when he lost to Ettiene and Shufford.

If you want to hold these losses against Brewster, then by the same standard of logic, you should dismiss Jimmy Young and Ken Norton as good fighters. This is because Norton was knocked out by so-so Jose Garcia, and Young was beaten by the likes of Randy Neuman and Clay Hodges. That wouldn't make much sense, I'm sure you'll agree.

 

Check Vlad's record on boxrec.com. You'll see that many of the names he's fought since 2000 are or were top 10 fighters when he fought them. Vlad has cleaned out the division aside from those specific heavies who are protected because they are handled by promoters who don't want to throw their fighters in with Vlad (for the obvious reasons).

Again, I'm not trying to sound too pro-Klitschko...earlier in this thread I was arguing that he doesn't merit true all-time great status and probably never will. He'll be a near-great, but no better.

 

"Chagaev and Valuev would not rate much of a chance against Vlad anyway."

I really don't know how you could be this certain, especially about Valuev who would tower over Wlad and has a good chin. If he takes Wlad into the later rounds, who knows.

 

I don't want to get hung up on the adjective "available". Did they fight the best of their time?

Jeffries--I think any list of the top heavies of the 1896-1905 era would include and be headed by Johnson, Fitz, Corbett, Sharkey, Ruhlin, Armstrong, and Choynski. He also fought Jackson and Goddard, top men of the previous generation. In time and place, he basically fought the best he could, unfortunately in Johnson's case, not when he should have.

Johnson--Many were old, many were green, and some were small, but Johnson was in with the best of his time, Jeff, Fitz, Burns, Hart, Langford, Jeannette, McVea, Martin, Ketchel, O'Brien, etc.

Now my point is that the first question I would ask of a fighter is did he fight the best of his time and beat many or most of them. Jeff and Johnson did. Wlad has not. If we ask why not, we can get into the politics that may have prevented it.

I am not evaluating how these opponents would stack up head to head, only if the fighter fought the best of his time.