Sonny Liston or Wladimir Klitschko who rates higher as a all time heavyweight?

Just because Pinklon and Buster had single moments where they knocked someone down with a jab doesn't automatically make their jabs better than Wlad's. That's cherry-picking isolated incidents versus evaluating overall effectiveness.

You want the best example of Wlad's ATG jab? Watch the Chagaev fight, where he established total control with it. Or look at the Byrd rematch, Sultan Ibragimov, or Haye fights - all masterclasses in jab control. Against Rahman, his jab systematically broke down a former champion.

What's even more impressive is how effectively Wlad's jab worked against southpaws like Ibragimov and Byrd - something that's notoriously difficult for orthodox fighters. Most great jabbers struggle against southpaws, yet Wlad completely neutralized them with his jab.

The '47 fights' argument ignores context - Wlad completely reinvented his style with Steward. It's like saying Foreman wasn't great because he lost to Ali, ignoring his comeback. Ironically, you mentioned Lewis who also didn't have a great jab before developing it with Steward - the same trainer who transformed Wlad's jab.

As for Peter, the Helenius comparison is flawed - he fought an out-of-shape, worn-out version of Peter who was in much better condition against Wlad.

If the jab is measured by its effectiveness in winning fights, controlling opponents, and sustaining championship success, Wlad's jab stands with the best. There's a reason he was nearly untouchable for 11 years straight.

 

Lmao, the irony.

 

Absolutely Glass… similar to Holmes in his time Wlad was “The man” and everybody knew it, politics make things tricky and semantics shouldn’t barrier us from common sense… If Dempsey can be considered the champ despite avoiding / missing Wills and Gus Lesnevich can be champ despite avoiding Bivins then why not Wlad for missing his own brother LOL or Holmes with Page etc sometimes a champ just “ducks” someone there’s better money elsewhere, slave contracts only on the table etc the people elect “The man” in those situations… at least that’s my silly opinion I don’t know my boxing history really.

 

You have a point or just want to act smug?

 

TBH that discusson made not a lot of sense to be because it is comparing Liston's tomatos to Wlad's potatos.

Wlad was champion already deep in the "Alphabet Soup" era.
Liston was champion when belts meant something.

On one side it is kinda more difficult to claim "undisputed" or "unified" status, when everybody around carries a belt and there is so much politics and manouevring titles around.
On the other side, during the "Alphabet Soup" getting a Belt sometimes is ridiculously easy.

Had Liston fought during the "Alphabet Soup" Era he would probably become champion 1-2 years earlier. No need to wait until Floyd got tired of running on his bicycle,

 

They didn't just have single momentary instances of great jabs. Everybody knows they had consistently good jabs.

Its impressive to floor and stop guys with the jab because opponents in the 80s had legs. Wlad fought in the era of plodding non-movers and still couldn't fell a guy with this lighting bolt from the Gods you call a jab.
The evidence is there for all to see in the Douglas highlight reel i posted. Snap , doubles , triples. Body head. Feints. Things WK could not do. Shoot in a straight line was his limit. No levels.

I can accuse you of cherry picking examples here.
Chaggy took the fight on short notice and very foolishly fought the fight on the outside , and directly in Wlads line of sight. Chaggys mistakes made it very easy for Wlad to walk him into his jab.

Byd had no legs whatsover in the rematch. He literally blocked punches with his face.
Sultan?Worse fight ever with barely any exchanges of punches.

Haye? Thats where you slipped up. WK was deduced a point for for repeatedly holding and clinching Haye. He barely landed a jab on Haye.
Haye who is awful on the front foot breached WKs wheelhouse often and enough times to make him lose a point for holding.
Tony Bellew kept Haye on the outside without ever needing to clinch. Haye simply got nowhere near Tony Bellew.
In fact the best punch landed in the Klitschko fight was by Haye , in the 12th round. Wlad was hanging on for dear life.
Rahman? LOL . . Rahmans ghost took that fight on 2 weeks notice. So i dont want to hear any excues about Haye vs Bellew whrn you just cited guys who were barely functional and medically unfit to fight (chaggy)

And yet you just put forward Rahmans cadaver , who was in way worse shape than Peter was as evidence. In the scend go around Wlad was cheating and fouling just the same if not worse because this time he was in Germany.

https://www.boxingnews24.com/2010/09/steward-was-telling-wladimir-to-stop-clinching-peter/

No ATG jabber would have to resort to becoming a human octapus against such a low leveller like Peter.

Futhermore , how many top tier jabber did he even fight let alone beat?

He outright refused to meet Pulev jab for jab. Instead resorting to bear hugging repeatedly. A disgusting performance. Thinking about it reminds me what a weasel fighter he was. He literally plunged himself into Pulev over and over. Sometimes with double handed fist pumps. Similar to what Pacquaio did to Clottey

And of course there is the Povetkin disgrace which will invalidate any claim to him having an ATG jab for all eternity

 

No. Absolutely not.

When a title is vacant, you don't win it by default because you have the other belts. You need to fight for it.

 

You're making a lot of claims that simply don't match what happened in those fights.

First, flooring someone with a jab is impressive but rare for any fighter - even great jabbers. The effectiveness of a jab isn't measured by knockdowns but by control, and by that measure, Wlad's jab was elite.

You dismiss every example of Wlad's jab dominance with excuses while accepting no criticism of your examples. Douglas had a good jab, but his career lasted about 15 minutes - Wlad's lasted 15 years. Consistency matters.

On Haye - you're rewriting history. Wlad jabbed Haye's face off the entire fight. Yes, there was clinching, but Haye barely landed anything meaningful besides that 12th round shot, and the point deduction didn't change the complete dominance. It was 118-108, 117-109, 116-110 - a complete shutout by jab.

Your claim about Pulev is bizarre - Wlad stopped him with a left hook set up by his jab. The Povetkin fight had excessive holding, sure, but Wlad still knocked him down four times.

Your whole argument boils down to: 'if he had an ATG jab, he would never need to hold.' That's not how boxing works. Even Holmes, Lewis, and Ali clinched when needed.

The fact remains: Wlad's jab was his primary weapon in one of the longest heavyweight championship reigns in history. No journeyman-level jabber accomplishes that.

 

Wladmir chose not to unify with his brother. Personally, I don't hold it against him as I myself would never fight my brother for any amount of money unless we could orchestrate the perfect dive without hurting each other.

But if we're judging things strictly based on historical context, the two brothers ducked each other and made the division pretty stagnant and mid since the two best guys never fought. I am not sure how Wladmir gets a pass because the other A level champion in his era was his brother, but Holmes is crucified for not unifying with guys like Thomas, Page, etc. Holmes had balls. He got in the ring with a prime Tyson on a short notice, fought prime Mercer/Holyfield as a fat old man, was willing to fight Coetzer and would've but politics got in the way.

Holmes didn't avenge the Spinx or Tyson losses, Wlad didn't avenge the Sanders or Puritty losses. At least Tyson and Spinx were ATG boxers. Sanders had great talent, but never really accomplished a lot outside of the Wlad fight, and Puritty was a journeyman punching bag who also didn't win much.

I just don't see how Holmes can be crucified, but Wlad gets a pass.

 

The title was not in dispute. Therefore, it was undisputed. You don’t make the rules, pal.

 

Was Wladmir awarded the belt in the ring, or by the sanctioning bodies, yes or no?

 

I really can't see a scenario where Liston would beat Wlad h2h.

 

There's a huge difference between the Klitschko brothers situation and Holmes not unifying with other champions. The Klitschkos made a promise to their mother never to fight each other. It wasn't about ducking competition, but honoring family.

Meanwhile, Wlad actively pursued unification with everyone else available. He unified the WBA, IBF, WBO, IBO, and Ring titles - something Holmes never attempted despite having opportunities with champions of his era.

Regarding avenging losses - context matters. Wlad didn't avenge Sanders/Puritty directly, but he completely transformed his style and went on an 11-year unbeaten streak afterward, proving those losses were about his development, not his ceiling. Holmes was already established when he lost to Spinks and Tyson though past his best.

Holmes deserves credit for fighting Tyson, Mercer, and Holyfield when older, but during his prime championship years, he wasn't known for seeking the toughest challenges or unification. He famously said "Why do two champions have to fight?" when asked about unification.

Both are all-time greats, but their approaches to unification during their prime championship years were completely different.

 

I already said on a personal level, I don't blame them for not fighting. But in terms of boxing history, it's a fact he didn't unify with the best boxer in his division for what, 11 years straight give or take (aside from Vitali's down time for injuries)...?

I'm aware he changed his style, but he never avenged those losses. So, again, if you are criticize Holmes you must criticize Wladmir.