For those who have the time and inclination to watch, please let me know what you think. Thanks! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68-ZgS4LYx8 [yt]68-ZgS4LYx8[/yt]
Is that you Rummy? Wlad did not make his legacies in the past up wased up names, say the way, Lennox Lewis did vs Holyfield and Tyson. He didn't beat on a Moorer or McCall either, but he did go 1-0 vs Rahman, while Lewis was 1-1 vs. the same guy. Wlad has a lasting legacy. He was on top for 2004-2015, winning 20 title fights in a row. We are talking only Holmes, and Joe Louis, getting perhaps a favorable call with the judges did as well or better. 2004 being the key date, as this is when Manny Stewart took control as his trainer. Ali would not be Ali without Dundee. Joe Louis would not be Joe Louis without BlackBurn. If Wlad had Steward from the get go, he would not lose to Purity for sure ( Stewart pulls back the reigns on a 22-year-old who never went past 8 rounds at the time ). Yes, he was KO'd 3 times. My reply, show me a heavyweight who fought 60+ times, and I'll show you a guy who was likely KO'd by lesser puncher than Sanders or Brewster and one who also was KO'd as often or more! Omit Ali and Holmes. Now go! I predict a very short list.
Yes it is. I don't think Rahman was quite the same by the time he faced Wladimir. True, but it's not a perfect comparison of course, because of the addition of numerous sanctioning bodies that surfaced over the years. I agree that Steward fine-tuned Wladimir's skills so that he can better utilize his strengths. But it's worth noting that the Wlad-Steward team did lose their first fight together. They may have been stopped by lesser punchers, but were they stopped by lesser fighters than Sanders and Puritty? Regardless, I have Wlad as a top 10 guy myself. Lower top 10, but top 10 nonetheless.
I watched the video last night and it was well delivered. One issue. .. How can Wlad sit around the 10 mark if Peters is his signature win. Thats like saying Lewis is a great cos he beat Tua minus Vitali , Tyson , Holyfield etc. And look how Lewis whitewashed Tua - a much better Sam Peters , while Wlad was yoyo'd by Peters and had to run and hold on for his life for 12 rounds. Can you see the enormous gap in levels here...
I'm not disagreeing with the spirit of what you're saying necessarily, but it's a very subjective "science". To me, Wladimir's longevity counts a good deal as does his dominance having not lost many rounds during his reign. Those 2 things help him a good deal. But then the flip-side you have his level of competition and the lack of a big signature victory. Even his own trainer had frequently claimed he though Wlad's era was the weakest era in HW history (and he said this several times between 2009-2012). It's a difficult and delicate balancing act that largely relies on personal preference. But for me, I think Wlad's longevity is what gets him there. His competition may not have been the greatest, but all we can ask of any champion is to face the guys available in his era, and Wladimir did beat most of the top guys 2006-2014.
True , Manny did say that. He also advised him not to go through with the Chisora fight and that says a lot. The reign really is all he has going for him and the list of bodies consisted of unskilled , plodders who fought Wlad in Germany where they were only allowed to box his fight. If he Glovkin'd or Roy Jones'd his way through that line of soup cans he'd have a much greater claim to greatness , but he didn't - he often struggled , looked horrible and relied heavily on biased refs to allow him win by any means necessary. Roy Jones gets penalized for fighting nobodies at 160&168 , but some of them were a lot better than the guys Wlad beat and Roy looked spectacular beating them. Somethings not right if you are unable to impress in a terrible era.
Same here. Look for him to KO Fury. After that, I'd like to see him retire or fight ( Wilder ) and then retire. Solid work on the doc. I could add a bit more. Wlad won the gold medal at 20 and turned pro very young. Wlad was actually​ sick at a low weight, and fighting in his home town for the first time as a professional at age 22 vs. Purrity. He had never gone past 8, and I think his trainers gave him bad advice. Purrity was an iron man, defensive type. Wlad was trying too hard to impress. A trainer's job is to know his fighter and opponents strength and weaknesses and give the fight advice. Fritz Sdunek, did not know his fighter's stamina, or Purrity's strengths, nor did he see a path on how Purrity can win. Sdunek didn't even know how to use Enswell back then and Wlad trained for bulk muscle, which really isn't ideal for boxing. After rounds 8, which Wlad had never been past, he should have told him just to box and take the decision. Don't punch yourself out. Put someone more seasoned in Wlad's corner that night he likely wins a decision. I'm not making an excuse for the loss, rather I'm saying Wald's team wasn't very good when he needed advice. Even the best race horses sometimes need a jockey to get him out of trouble. Wlad got caught by Sanders. No bones about it. Wlad was over condifent, and his team had no idea of Sanders's capaibilites. It was an uneneccasaey high risk, low reward type of fight. Sdunek's advice in the corner once again wasn't very good. He failed to put water on his man's face to help wake him up and the transtion of his advise from German to English was something like " hold on ". However, the losses in the grand scheme of Wlad's hall of fame career helped him. Defeat can be more instructive than victory. Once Steward took over, he changed Wlad's tactics and style and training methods, having him spar more, and train for stamina. Stewart taught Wlad about his fight zone terminology for super heavyweights which basically says in this area, you can hit and not be hit. In addion, Wlad learned how to block / take away the left hook and of coruse how to clinch if needed. Stamina actually became a strength of Wlad's thanks to sparring 80+ rounds while preparing for fights.
Who says Peter is his best win? Ranking Walds best title match wins based on whom they have beaten in their career and how good I think they were/are when they fought Wlad. Some of the rankings are very close, so Im not going to debate them if they are 1-4 spots apart. 23 opponents in world title matches, some of whom were beaten twice. Povetkin Ibragimov Byrd Chagaev Peter Haye Brewster Jennings* ( Much if his career is left ) could go up or down Pulev* ( Much of his career is left ) could go up or down Chambers Thompson McCline Rahman Brock Mercer Austin Wach Botha Pianeta Jefferson Mormeck Shufford Leapai
When did he say that? Well, that's the main point where we differ - the longevity in itself was impressive. Wladimir's consistency was a marvel, and despite the fact he wasn't always aesthetically pleasing to watch - he rarely lost a round and he possessed tremendous power in both hands. Now if Wlad's reign was 3-4 years against this type of opposition, I think you'd have a stronger argument. But since it was close to 10 years - I just can't comprehend someone NOT being impressed by his reign.
Yeah, it wasn't meant so much as a documentary, more than me just haphazardly rambling off on somewhat of a chronological recollection of my recap of what I known. When I first heard of the Klitschkos, like I said, it was on a boxing forum. I remember Golota was rumored to face one it was announced in late 1999 after Golota-Grant. Golota jokingly quipped that he was open to facing a Klitschko provided he didn't have to face both at the same time. But then Golota suffered the accident around that time which forever tainted his once outstanding jab. That's probably when I first started taking note of them, as I was a huge Golota fan back then. I would see the fights with Puritty, Byrd I, and a few others at some point around then - on VHS believe it or not. But it wasn't until Bostice and Barrett (on the Lewis undercards) that I saw Wlad. I've seen most of his fights on live TV since - barring a few odd ones (notably his fight with Botha was not televised in the US). I was also ringside for Brock (seated 2 over from Bert Sugar) and I was auxiliary press area for Ibragimov (which was pretty far back at MSG). I don't hold Wlad's losses against him anymore than I hold it against Lennox. Anyone can have an off night, boxing is a difficult sport, and it's what they both did after their losses that is more important than the losses themselves.
I'm not necessarily saying it's his "best" or "most impressive" win. But I do view that as his signature victory. He was able to overcome the odds and adversity to resurrect his career in a transitional (with Emanuel) effort that launched his reign of dominance. There is no single victory in Wladimir's career that I think even comes close to rivaling that in terms of "signature" wins.
