Name one Hall-of-Fame fighter that Wladimir Klitschko has beaten

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by rockfish2322, Oct 3, 2010.


  1. freelaw

    freelaw Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,143
    916
    Nov 17, 2007
    He don't blast tghem like Tyson cause he's not that type of a fighter. He dominates them completely almost everytime though.
     

  2. So little lad, you think a top HW now hits his prime as a 25 year old now?
     
  3. Jorodz

    Jorodz watching Gatti Ward 1... Full Member

    21,677
    52
    Sep 8, 2007
    yup, it sucks but while i don't think wlad NEEDS it to be HOF material he certainly needs a big fight and a worthy opponent for his legacy and to destroy a lot of doubts

    i just disagree that it's haye. not anymore. haye may be big in terms of money but status? legacy? he brings nothing to the table but a worthless paper belt
     
  4. rockfish2322

    rockfish2322 Member Full Member

    326
    0
    May 4, 2006
    Well, I played basketball all of my life so I look at boxing a little differently than most of you. Duke beat Butler last year by 2 points in the final, but that doesnt mean they should rematch and that Butler would beat them next time because they got close. It means they lost. So if Vitaly loses to Lewis on cuts, then Lewis doent need to rematch the guy, he just plain beat him. And if Wladimir get brutally KOed by some chumps and then developes a boring style that makes him hard to beat (and watch) then he goes on beating guys who are forgetable fighters but beats them in yawners, then hes not the best ever, hes just really good and REALLY SMART TO FIGHT THAT WAY BECAUSE HE KNOWS HIS CHIN IS SUSPECT. No he hasnt lost a round in years but he also hasnt fought a live opponent in 5 years either and he also hasnt KOed a guy in 2 or 3 rounds in 5 years either and he also hasnt been on HBO in years either. Any way you look at it its sad. To compare this guy or his brother (whos best fight was one he lost) to Ali or any of the other greats is plain nonsense. They are both good fighters but not great fighters because great fighters dominate the comp not bore them to death and the audience.
     
  5. Jorodz

    Jorodz watching Gatti Ward 1... Full Member

    21,677
    52
    Sep 8, 2007
    good article
     
  6. Davo

    Davo Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,977
    504
    May 27, 2010
    Great post! :good

    Maybe a bit unfair to Vitali in the watchability stakes. He's definitely no ATG but he's also nowhere near as boring as Wlad. His comeback has kinda sucked but he had some very watchable fights at the top earlier on.
     
  7. rockfish2322

    rockfish2322 Member Full Member

    326
    0
    May 4, 2006
    I think Vitaly's fights are watchable, but he needs to pick tougher opponents than he has. The valuev fight should have happened as well as others that never went through.
     
  8. Rumsfeld

    Rumsfeld Moderator Staff Member

    49,541
    16,033
    Jul 19, 2004
    Stupid thread.

    Wlad could beat Holyfield tomorrow, and what the **** would that prove?

    Tyson, Louis, and Wlad have all dominated eras that were viewed as being "weak" and none of them fought with the same style. They all fight differently.

    :smoke
     
  9. Jorodz

    Jorodz watching Gatti Ward 1... Full Member

    21,677
    52
    Sep 8, 2007
    rummy i wanna take you seriously but that avatar is ****ed up
     
  10. jdr

    jdr Guest

    no its ok i would rather just tell you to **** off
     
  11. Rumsfeld

    Rumsfeld Moderator Staff Member

    49,541
    16,033
    Jul 19, 2004
    I lost an avatar bet!
    :lol:

    That shouldn't take away from the merit of my post, though.

    What would it really mean if Wlad had decided to fight Evander Holyfield this December? It's a fight he could have taken, and then he would have a win over a definite future Hall of Famer.

    But what would the point be in making that fight? Holyfield is obviously a mere shell of what he once was, and has been in decline for over ten years. He doesn't know when t o quit.

    A win over Holyfield at this stage would mean very little.

    It would be on par with Larry Holmes beating Ali. Sure, Holmes holds a victory over a "Hall of Fame" fighter, but the reality is Ali was SHOT at thata time. The win doesn't really mean much in the eyes of most.

    A Wladimir victory over Holyfield would be viewed in the same light at this stage, so the entire argument is flawed.

    Since winning the IBF title from Byrd in April 2006, Wladimir has beaten everyone put in front of him and has done so in dominant fashion. There are no prime Joe Fraziers out there for him to fight.

    :smoke
     
  12. Jorodz

    Jorodz watching Gatti Ward 1... Full Member

    21,677
    52
    Sep 8, 2007
    pretty much says it all. people love to forget the flaws with fighters of the past and **** on todays fighters. as you said, holmes got **** in his era. louis got **** in his. ****, marciano fought next to no one save for moore and charles. wlad is doing what MOST heavyweight champs do, dominate lesser competition. not every era is gonna be the 70s or 90s...****, NO era was the 70s or 90s.
     
  13. Hatesrats

    Hatesrats "I'm NOT Suprised..." Full Member

    60,376
    241
    Sep 28, 2007
    This content is protected
     
  14. sosolid4u09

    sosolid4u09 4 8 15 16 23 42 banned Full Member

    12,433
    3
    Jun 21, 2008
    agree 100% great post
     
  15. Bubby

    Bubby Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,564
    3
    Sep 14, 2010
    I just love the way guys post photos of women they could never get!:lol: