vladimir klichkos quality of wins as thin as cigarette paper

They were never Lennox’s best wins.

 

I think he was a good boxer . Not extraordinary but good .

Yes , he had the technique of clinching when somebody managed to enter the infight. In the infight his long arms as well his not bulletproof chin put him in danger . At long distance he was superior .

He was also good in creating sympathy and trust of the fans by being nice and polite and so covered a bit his good marketed bum fights after a loss .

All in all i would not say "thin as paper' but also not an absolute legend.

 

Wlad’s resume is still much better than Fury’s will ever be.

 

Wlad has great longevity, Fury has more quality at the top end and no losses. I don't think Fury would want to swap.

 

I mean valuev always fought like he wasn't trying to hurt anyone. It's due to his hands being so damn slow

 

man nobody wants to hear that ****. Povekin would dive in head first and lung right into the clinch every time. If he was a better fighter, he would have adjusted

you asked for his top 5 wins, they were posted on the first reply.

don't preach to people about being able to cope with other people's opinion when the whole point of this bull**** thread is to cry about other peoples opinions when they make it

 

typical fury fan propaganda thread.

 

FYI. About 10+ years ago, somebody tired of the Ali worship on this site, posted something similar about Ali's entire record. He didn't call Ali's resume cigarette paper thin, but that was the objective of the post. Or it might have been a topic he started.

As best I can recall, he had a short phrase or maybe a full sentence for everyone of Ali's career opponents. Most of the comments about Ali's opponents were like this thread, very disparaging. By today's or you can say back to early 2000s standards, most of Ali's wins were vs. CWs or very small HWs. Six name opponent bouts were vs. Frazier & Norton. He's a legit 2-1 vs. Joe F but the 2-1 vs. Ken N is laughable. I saw Al Bernstein say that he doesn't think Ali ever truly defeated Norton. I agree. You could give Ali the decision in Norton #2 or call it a draw, but he lost the 3rd fight. So more like 1-2 or 0-2-1 vs. chinny Ken N. Neither Frazier nor Norton would be fringe contenders among recent to current HWs. Just not big enough. Wlad, Vitali, Lennox, and top current HWs would massacre them. Against Holmes, Ali looked like 38 going on 58 and lost badly. Wlad was 41 vs. a much younger 6' 6" AJ. While Wlad lost, he looked good, and gave AJ a scare. // Other name wins? Patterson 2X, Quarry 2X, both CWs. Chuvalo 2X, like Frazier & Norton, would be a small HWs in recent to current HW scene. Ali's resume is littered w/ CW to very small HW opponents, most no hoppers & bums without going to the extremes the OP has here to malign Wlad.
I could reconstruct what that guy did many years ago, but right now I don't care to spend the time. That post or thread got lots of activity long ago, and I'm sure a similar analysis of Ali's resume would do the same today

What's the point? Many, the main point is you can make threads like this easily for any top name HW. And it generally gets easier the further back in time you go. Analyzing HWs is different from all the other divisions since it's unlimited weight. Over the past 100+ years people have gotten bigger and the potential pool of big men has exploded. And not just b/c the world pop has grown. Even before the Soviet Union, there was essentially no HW boxers competing from Eastern Europe. It wasn't until the 1990s after the break up of the Soviets did big men from there start competing. From the 1890 to 1990 HW boxing was mostly an Anglo-American club w/the occasional continental Euro or S American. Starting in the 1990s HW boxing became a much wider club. It still amuses me how triggered many fans are about this. Apparently many people are not as pro diversity as the like to act they are
Look how many top fighters, HW & below, have emerged from Eastern Europe during the past generation. One of them is featured here! Before the 90s that entire pool was blocked off.

 

quality ??? What is that ancient wlad or wilder?lol

 

Not really Norton vs Ali 2 was a very clear win for Ali 7-5, and the 3rd Norton fight most people have as a 1 point fight either way. Lets see how modern Heavyweights would do fighting 3 times a year fighting tough opposition every year like Ali, and after having 55 fights being past their prime having to deal with a stylistic nightmare like Norton.

Nonsense Wilder has weighed below 220+ pounds for alot of his fights, Norton was 6'3 220 pounds with an 80 inch reach size wise he would do just fine, and would be able to beat fighters ranked in the top 10 like Whyte, Parker, etc.

Frazier beat big Heavyweights like Bugner who was 6'4, Mathis who was 6'3 240+ pounds. Frazier would literally send fighters like Whyte to the shadow realm.

 

Wlad away and Wilder away are better wins than Haye, Byrd, Povetkin (greco-roman), Peter, Pulev, Thompson etc. Wlad had poleaxed Pulev in 5 rounds 12 months prior for instance.

 

After LL hung em' up there have been no great Heavyweight Champions.

 

Mathis was simply fat and Bugner was tiny compared to guys today. Frazier isn't tested at all against skilled big men.

How on earth is a 6'3 1/2 221 pound Bugner a big heavyweight by today's standards

 

And i suppose Andy Ruiz isn't fat either ? he's shorter than Mathis and upset Joshua who's Super Heavyweight so that argument doesn't work.

I never said it's big for today's standards ? the other poster said they would be too small and i don't agree. Wilder, Usyk, are considered top 5 Heavyweights and have weighed 220 pounds and Wilder has weighed less.

Bugner was 6'4 and weighed between 220-230 pounds, Norton was 6'3 and weighed 220 pounds, and Mathis was 6'3 and 240 pounds. They are reasonably sized Heavyweights to take on a majority of the top 10 Heavyweights of today. I think Norton could beat the likes of Whyte, Parker, Chisora, who were all ranked in the top 10.

 

The meta shifted in the 90's when there were heavyweights billed as 6'5, 235+ lbs with better skills and athleticism than heavyweights of that size previously. Bowe and Lewis were too big for Holyfield, despite Holyfield being ranked higher on the "P4P" lists.

Heavyweights in years since have got bigger still: Klitschko's, Fury, Wilder, Joshua. Usyk being the exception but even he's taller, rangier and heavier than Holyfield, as well as being a southpaw (no southpaw heavies above Euro level prior to the 90's, the two most accomplished prior to Usyk being sub-cruisers) with an iron chin.

The Willard's, Carnera's and even the Cooney's (who was the closest) aren't in the same tradition. There's no telling how the chin of a 210 lbs Norton (his weight when he schooled Ali), which was suspect even against much smaller men, would hold up against the top 10 today. I don't imagine it would hold up well, ditto Frazier. Even if they were able to win fights against the Whyte's and Chisora's, they'd be shot in no time from the massive punishment their relatively small frames would sustain from the PED-charged 250+ lbs behemoths.