Video: Wlad final week of camp

This is false.

Let's say Wlad had decided to fight Fury instead of this guy. Now he's got Fury under his belt. But, you say, he'll fight Fury anyway.

But what if Chisora eliminates him? What then? Well, then, he's beaten this guy and the contender that probably would have brought him the second most credit of all contenders is gone. Chisora gets his shot, but Chisora doesn't carry as much weight as a legacy winner, Vitali has already beat the crap out of him, Haye has embarrassed him.

And what if Fury only losses because of a bad camp, but he retires in a tantrum after the fight?

And his legacy has been hurt.

That happens over, and over, and over again. EVERY lesser fighter he fights is a dissolution of his legacy, almost. Because guess what? The other top guys fight each other, eliminate each other etc.

It inarguably has. How can you say this? You are saying that Wlad's career is no different if he fights this guy instead of Pulev right now? That's really your argument? He fights twice a year.

The real world isn't a computer game. Other things happen.

 

That's not on Wlad. That's on the referee. Fighters - Tyson, Holfyield, Wladimir, Lewis, they do what they can get away with.

Prove Wladimir or his representatives paid off the referee.

 

So you think EVERY inept refereeing performance that seems to favour one fighter over another that you have ever seen is EVIDENCE that the referee has been bribed, and what is more you think that everyone who thinks otherwise is blind or doesn't understand the rules?

 

That's right, he doesn't "need" to beat him (in fact beating him would now be meaningless) because he's been beaten. But if he beats him first he receives a full portion of credit.

It's not a giant fight, it's not an overwhelming threat, it's just a chance to dispatch the world's #3 heavyweight when NO other heavyweight will be able to replace him like for like. Missed opportunity, compromised legacy. Inarguable.

Forget the Hopkins quote; it doesn't matter. It's meaningless. It was just a nice way to springboard into the question. There's nothing to duck.

I can't be bothered to check, but here is a full and complete answer:

Every single heavyweight who has ever been in the top ten who was eliminated by a fighter other than Wlad.

It's impossible, completely, to get them all - i'm not saying he should get them all, that's madness. What i'm saying to you is, whenever he fights a fighter of Leapai's standard, he is missing an opportunity to beat up a good fighter instead. And that's a fact. That's inarguable.

If he fought Fury, and Chisora fought Leapai, and Chisora beat Leapai and then Wlad fought Chisora, his legacy is enhanced. ALWAYS pursuing the best available (won't always be the #1 or even a top five contender) is INARGUABLY better for legacy than fighting guys like Leapai.

It's an infallible argument - it is literally impossible to contradict it sensibly. Sorry bud, but the reverse - that fighting Leapai is ok because he fights everyone that matters is completely indefensible on every level.

 

I'm not. It's an entirely valid question. I don't see a bad refereeing performance as proof of corruption.

I'm asking you if you do?