Is Wlad the best all-time-heavyweight? NO OPINION, just PURE RECORD ANALYSIS

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by knn, Jun 21, 2008.


  1. knn

    knn amanda Full Member

    1,088
    0
    Jun 21, 2008
    I know, I wrote it in my first post that Valuev has an abysmal bum ratio and is overprotected. That can be read from my calculations.
     
  2. knn

    knn amanda Full Member

    1,088
    0
    Jun 21, 2008
    Did you just compare running with heavyweight boxing?


    Yes, that's why we have TWO record lists. One for 100m and one for marathon.

    BUT THIS IS NOT HOW BOXING FANS ARE VIEWING IT.

    They _DO_ compare Ali's TKO14 with Wlad's UD12. They _DO_ think that Marciano was better heavyweight than nowadays heavyweights merely because is called "HEAVYWEIGHT".

    To be fair you would have to make 1 record list for any regulation change.
    Put Ali at #1 but don't include Lennox or Mike there.
    Put Lennox #1 but don't include Ali or Frazier there.

    But this is exactly HOW NOBODY WANTS TO HAVE IT.

    They all want to see "A heavyweight ranking of all times".

    So we must find UNIFIED RULES.

    Did you just compare a 140+ vs 140+ fight with heavyweights?

    Sorry, the plan for heavyweights definitely not to wait until round 15 to TKO someone.

    Even if. You cannot claim that ANY heavy has a plan to NOT KO someone fast, instead to wait after the 12th round.

    That is problematic, but for comparability reasons we have to find unified regulations.

    I disagree, altough you used caps, boldness and underlining. I think my alternative of converting TKO13+ to UD12 is reasonable and acceptable.

    Of course there is NO CLEAR indication.
    By my own calculation Puritty is a bum and was very unlikely to beat Wladimir Klitschko. But Wlad gassed and a TKO loss is a TKO loss.

    But this is a comparison of the career achievements not single fights or single clashes between two fighters.

    Wrong. He _IS_ better against them since he usually KOs them.
     
  3. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,297
    7,049
    Oct 25, 2006
    I think this is pretty accurate.
     
  4. Antsu

    Antsu Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,144
    367
    Mar 5, 2006
    It seems to me that you excluded the all-time leader on your rankings. The man who is number Uno in almost all categories with your wonderful ranking system.

    "Super" Brian Nielsen
    41 non-bum heavyweight fights (39 WINS, 9 by NON-KO).

    Stat #1 Total number of KOs "Super" Brian has (T)KOed many more non bums than Wladimir so he takes a lead in this category. Totally 30 non bum (T)KOs in his awesome record. :deal

    Stat #2 Total number of WINS Brian has beaten 14 more non bums than Wladimir so he takes the lead hands down in this category.

    Stat #3 KO-ratio Joe Louis leads this category by awesome 100% KO ration. Only true all-time great could KO all his opponents in heavyweights.

    Stat #4 WIN-LOSS Ratio This category goes to the all-time great Brian Nielsen with 39 wins and only two defeats.
    Brian leads here with (95.1%) Second comes Valuev (94.7%)
    Wladimir Klitschko (89%), then Lennox (88%), Ali (81%), Foreman (78%), Holmes (78%), Tyson (72%), Holyfield (65% = abysmal)

    Stat #5 Total number of non-bum heavyweight fights Brian leads here also (41) , I don’t see any one catching him in near future. Wladimir is only in (27) fights against non bums, so Nielsens lead is not in danger.

    So answer to your question (Is Wlad the best all-time-heavyweight? NO OPINION, just PURE RECORD ANALYSIS)

    NO HIS NOT.



    With your pure record analyze style we get "SUPER" BRIAN NIELSEN :happy
     
  5. darwoody

    darwoody New Member Full Member

    2
    1
    May 24, 2008
    Nice work Antsu, this thread has been driving me crazy.
    I knew there had to be a flaw in the method and you found it.
    All hail Brian Nielsen!!!!!
     
  6. Antsu

    Antsu Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,144
    367
    Mar 5, 2006
    Didn’t have anything better to do in work :rofl
     
  7. konaman

    konaman Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,377
    1
    May 28, 2008
    Lol im surprised how friendly everyone has been.

    This is easily the stupidest thread posting ive ever seen on this forum.
     
  8. acb

    acb De Camaguey... Gavilan Full Member

    9,448
    4
    Jan 6, 2007
    :lol::lol:
     
  9. acb

    acb De Camaguey... Gavilan Full Member

    9,448
    4
    Jan 6, 2007
    :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
     
  10. Asterion

    Asterion Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,459
    20
    Feb 5, 2005
    You put a lot of effort in your analysis. Interesting.

    The only problem is that you're using an analysis technique that is manufactured a priori to favour your argument.
     
  11. knn

    knn amanda Full Member

    1,088
    0
    Jun 21, 2008
    Thank you for bringing up Brian Nielsen.

    This is the same problem as with Sam Langford: Many fights but no outstanding wins. And these many fights simply add up.

    It's time to re-calculate 2 levels deep = with quality of opposition.
     
  12. knn

    knn amanda Full Member

    1,088
    0
    Jun 21, 2008
    I would not necessarily say that Wlad is the all-time-heavy, but if you look it objectively ANY of the past great names would have greatest difficulties with Wlad. And that fact is constantly denied or laughed away by old-time-fans (or by believers of the brainwashing repetition that the "heavies suck").

    After a few years Wlad will retire and people will (as they alway do) bash the then-current heavyweight division and will want Wlad back who would "wipe the floor with any" of the then-current pitiful heavies.

    I wanted to introduce a calculation THAT HELPS to OBJECTIVELY assess a fighter's value aside from hype or opinion or outside-of-ring-behavior. My calculation WILL ALWAYS have flaws but nevertheless can be a great help: First throw out the bum fights and then then check the KO-ratio.

    What I want to say: It seems that boxing fans are maybe the most unthankful fans regarding a current sports scene and they dwell in pasttime memories of boxers (whom maybe they were impressed by as children).

    When watching Wlad (or, heck, even Samuel Peter or Valuev) you could be watching history in the making (I don't claim it's history in the making BUT IT COULD BE). If Wlad KOs Valuev (or vice versa) then this could be exactly a DEFINING fight like Ali vs Foreman that in 10 years will put Wlad at #1 of ATG.

    What I observed from the ESB comment box is that people BEFORE or SHORTLY AFTER a fight try to justify why an opponent LOST to Wlad (e.g. Brewster's eye) but already after a week or so the opinion changes and people accept Wlad's win and admit his domination. The same stuff with Ibragimov: You may complain about Wlad's terrible style, but after a year nobody cares anymore and simply books the fight as "UD win won with the left hand".

    Look how nice people are to Lennox Lewis now.
     
  13. Antsu

    Antsu Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,144
    367
    Mar 5, 2006
    Didn’t you say that there should be no opinion and just pure record analysis.

    Why is it that there is something wrong with the system when Wladimir is not the number one in it?
    Maybe Wladimir is just overrated like those old-timers?

    I’m sure when you make your second generation record analyst, you will find a way to get Wlad number one again.

    For now thought, that place still belongs to Super Brian.[FONT=&quot][/FONT] :deal
     
  14. petrozza

    petrozza The Great Visionary Full Member

    1,168
    0
    Mar 6, 2006
    You know I watched Ali vs. Jurgen Blin on ESPN Classic last night.. Ali won by a 7th round KO but he spent most of the fight running around and sticking his jab. Whenever Blin, who was 28-8-6 (just 7 of those 28 wins by KO) and 20+ lbs lighter tried to close the distance, Ali either jumped away or clinched.
     
  15. kg0208

    kg0208 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,031
    6
    Aug 8, 2005
    Now you're simply denying factual evidence by trying to prove your opinion on how things should be measured is correct. Your premise is false. It's that simple. Enjoy your stay here at ESB.