McILVANNEY Picks Wlad

So why say that it's a matter of semantics? atsch

Also, this isn't just a matter of fighting weights. It's a matter of level of competition faced, chin, and experience at the weight. All of the boxers I listed were established as Heavyweights, could take a good punch from a Heavyweight, and also had a good dig themselves. If you really believe that people on that list would lose to Wladimir Klitschko H2H, or that Wlad is a better ATG than anyone on that list, then I would invite you to share that opinion with people on the Classic's board, and see what response you get. You seem to have Wladimir Klitschko way over-rated in the annals of boxing history. Yes, he is the best currently, but that is not saying all that much. That is also the view expressed by McIlvanney. :deal

 

I agree. I think he has forgotten quite a lot of heavyweight boxing history which is why he thinks Wladimir Klitschko would be merely ordinary in other eras.

This guy sounds punch drunk from writing too much about boxing. :good

 

I appreciate you inviting me to Classic's board, but I do frequent that side of the forum and express my thoughts as well.

 

Clearly there's an orchestrated effort to attack the heavyweight division by the west because the west can't compete with the east........

 

I just don't think over the passage of time that Wladimir Klitschko will be rated as one of the leading ATG Heavyweights. Seriously, where would you rate him if he beats Haye and then retires. Top ten, top twenty??? There is no way he gets near the top ten for me, and would struggle to get near the top twenty.


I see the ESB boards are now swamped by Klitschko fans who seem to argue that they are up with the greatest of all time. On another thread they are arguing that Wlad is as good as, or even better than Lennox Lewis. When you are dealing with that level of fanboy irrationality then I'm done with the conversation! atsch

It's one thing talking about the fight against Haye and predicting Wlad will win, but some of the other comments are seemingly lacking in perspective, and are not located within the realms of reality!

 

I raised the question in the classic forum - If Wlad beats Haye will that cement him in the top 15 ATG HW's.

About 2/3 or 67% said yes.

Stats tell alot of the story.

If he beats Haye he will have:

10 title defenses (15 if you count his WBO reign)
5+ years as Champ (almost 8 years if you count the WBO)
One of the best KO/Rounds Won %
Signature Win - David Haye

Wlad could definetly get into the top ten if he fights another 3-4 years.

If he fights for that long with 3 title defenses each year that would be 9-12 defenses on top of his 10 title defenses (or 15).

This content is protected

He can add to his legacy by:

Winning the WBC title when Vitali retires.

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Anyone who puts Wlad in the top 10 ATG at heavy is insane. Yes, he's dominated an era, good for him...but he's no ATG. He's a very good fighter in a very weak era.

 

If he beats Haye do you think he should be in the top 15?

 

I think top 20 isn't a slap in the face. I think if he can keep defending the titles, be the first ever HW to unify all 4 major belts, maybe hit 20 defenses (which he can providing he's active) then MAYBE top 10 status is doable. I just don't know if he will be able to accomplish all that though.

 

Mind if I see your Top 20?

I, personally, find it very difficult to leave Wlad out of the top 15 if he beats Haye.

The others that could fill the void either have too many losses, not enough time as champion, etc.

Just looking at the numbers he has a very good resume compared to others in the past.

 

I think when he retires he will have a shot at being in the top 20, if he keeps winning. However, compared to the top ten there are some holes in his record, particularly h2h. If Wlad's signature win would be defeating David Haye then it's not saying much, as I don't think Haye is all that great. I think to get in the top ten ATG list you need to have beaten better quality opposition. It's not Wlad's fault that he is the best in a weak division, but he has also lost to fighters he really shouldn't have. Also, he is never going to fight the other top fighter in the division which is his brother. This leaves him a bit unproven in terms of fighting top class Heavyweights as generally the division has been poor for qute some time. Props to the guy for dominating the division for as long as he has, but I just don't see him as right up there with the greatest ever at the weight.

 

I don't have a list written down but off the top of my head and in no order I would put the following in front of Wlad. These are based off accomplishments and records.

Ali
Louis
Lewis
Foreman
Frazier
Tyson
Marciano
Dempsey
Frazier
Patterson
Holmes
Holyfield
Moorer (first southpaw and 2 time champ)

That's 13. I bet if I dug deeper I could find 2 more people to put in front of Wlad.

 

First I have to say I don't think I have ever, ever seen Moorer put in the top 20 let alone top 15.

Moorer has 2 title defenses - Wlad will have 10 (15 if counting WBO)

Moorer was a champ for about 2 years in total. - Wlad has been champ for 5+ years

Moorer has a lower KO % (70%) - Wlad's KO % is 85%

Moorer has lost a lot more rounds and has lost via decision - Wlad has yet to lose via a decision...Moorer lost to Elisea Castillo who Wlad KO'd

Moorer has been KO'd not TKO'd which is worse IMO.

H2H - I would have Wlad beating Moorer very badly.

Patterson - Is much like Moorer, but I do have him ranked better than Moorer.

Patterson - too many losses, KO'd in the first round twice, outboxed multiple times by a much lesser fighter

Lower KO%, less title defenses, shorter reign as champion.

H2H - Wlad would hurt him very badly.

I can't put those guys in front of Wlad and the stats suggest this as well.

 

There are a few of the ATG HW's didn't beat anyone "Great".

Holmes and Tyson are the biggest names of that list.