Klitschko statistics: Myth or Facts?

Nice theories but we've seen life doesn't work like that.
Floyd had no issue fighting Zab coming off a loss.
I'm pretty sure there would be no complaints if Pac fights for a title next time out.
George Foreman fought (and beat) Michael Moorer coming off a loss.
Haye wasnt actually a contender either, he was one of 3 title holders who lost a unification fight.
ODLH walked into 2 or 3 title fights off the back of losses.

Personally I feel a close loss or good showing in a title fight means far more than beating 2 or 3 stiffs that proves absolutely nothing.

Get smashed embarrassingly, sure. Go back and prove yourself.
Put up a good show? Hell, that means far more IMO than koing a few part timers.

 

In the future I will try to be more sympathetic to the simple minded ESB crowd.

I don't want anyone to strain a brain muscle trying to come up with relevant questions or comments when its so much easier to blast some ignorant and irrelevant **** that clogs the thread with nonsense.

God forbid we have an intelligent conversation about boxing on here! :nono

Again, the list is about 7 guys. I ranked, them and only them, based on stats that I pulled from a single source. Its a simple thing to understand.

If being irritated with the academic limitations of the ESB keyboard warriors makes me a douche, then I'm obviously not the problem here!

 

I wouldn't count Vitali's "consecutive" championship reign as that long. When he was out for like 4 years, he had to come back, and fight for the title again.

No doubt, those are very impressive numbers, even if you take into account the weak era they fight in. Of course you have to put them in perspective when ranking them, which is why I say Wladimir is yet to crack the top 20ish of HW's, and Vitali to crack the top 30. If Wladimir fights on for another 4 years, and breaks, ties, or comes close to Joe Louis record, then that would be pretty special. I mean, if he eclipses the 70 win mark, with close to 60 knockouts, that would put him around 12-15.

I would also pick both Klitschkos over most HW's from other boxing eras.

 

Dude, you put those kind of statistics in any Academic Assignment you'll fail.

As limited as my brain is, it is clear that you tried to manipulate statistics to make K2 look a hell of a lot stronger (Statistically) than they already are.

Call me dim-witted, but that is as clear as day.

You're not fooling anyone, and you've spent this entire thread back-tracking.

Let's have an intelligent discussion based on legitimate statistics. Have you even bothered to provide your source?

atsch

P.S. Now I know where you Klit-Huggers get it from:

http://www.klitschko.com/home/next-fight/

"His two defeats came only as a result of injuries and he never lost his title in the ring. Klitschko has the highest knock out percentage ever of any reigning world heavyweight champions with 91 percent."

LOLLLLLLLLLL

 

I try to be truthful about the fighters. No matter if I like them or not I try to be fair.

I really try to be fair in my ways and sometimes that upsets popular opinions or fanboys. I know that the Klitschko brothers are dominant champions. I agree that Wlad is the true legit champ of the world. Personally I think they are good guys but I am critical of them as I am of all the fighters.

There is most likely a ton of things you and I agree on. And if we dont agree,dont take it personally.

On a side note,we all enjoy a little Trolling now and then.

 

Primo Carnera was not included but some of his fights were rigged by the Mafia so I am hesitant to bring him up.

 

Also if you wanna get hooked on stats,just remember that today's fighters have 2 additional belts to fight for and defend. In the old days there was only WBC,WBA,Ring.

Today more fighters have more title fights because of the WBO,IBF,IBO etc

 

atsch Another status quo spewing nob who doesnt know **** about THE REAL HISTORY of the champs .atsch

 

Naw bro i dont take it personal i just can never tell when ur serious thats all no worry's

 

Well, Lewis didn't beat any "atg's" who were in their prime - unless you consider Vitali Klitschko an ATG :yep

Tyson didn't either, Marciano didn't and Holmes didn't - yet most sane people would consider those guys atg hw champions. Wladimir Klitschko has to be considered as well, imo.

 

England??

Because I called out a bull**** list???


You fabricated list in order to hype up the Klitchkos. It's so obvious, it's pathetic.

Every fan who hypes up the SIMULTANEOUS title reigns of Vitali and Wlad is a ****ing joke. One or the other is the champ and which ever one you pick is a ***** champ because then have gone almost the whole ****ing decade without fighting the second best fighter in the division.

If Frazier and Ali tag teamed their reigns instead of beating the **** out of each other and split up the opposition to the ones best suited for their styles they would have NEVER lost.

And that's from Norcal.

So for reality to **** all over your"list".


Keith

 

Crack top 20? You are on crack dude. Wlad and Vitali are right there in top 5 in terms of consecutive title defenses, reign and KO percentages. Unless you are totally ******ed or have reading comprehension problems.

 

****ing klittards are the hypocrisy incarnate.

 

Lol. I like it.

Frazier/Ali tag team, nice. What about a Foreman/Ali tag team?
Holy/Lewis from the 90's would take some beating.

 

If you're gonna count vitali's fights now as championship fights then you have to count all titlists at all points to have been championship fights, and if you do that you'll probably find the list is dominated by black heavyweights defending the coloured championship around the turn of the century.