When and if Wlad beats Tyson...will he be above Lennox on the ATG list??

Chris Byrd was a slick, intelligent fighter. I have respect for Chris Byrd, but Lewis had lost his motivation by that point, what was there to prove going into fights he knew he would win?

Wlad has done nothing but fights cans for 10 years, not entirely his fault because it's the weakest HW era in decades.

Nobody in this thread is saying Wlad is bad, or doesn't deserve credit. He just isn't as good as Lewis plain and simple.

 

how come lewis only had avoided byrd and sanders ONCE this dwarf from three divisions down and this retired failure had destroyed the K bros.

 

:thumbsup

 

I thought Waldo was close to Lewis in the rankings before the Povetkin fight. A lot has changed in his favour since then.

 

Great post.

 

atsch

He beat Byrd twice. Byrd beat the same Holyfield that Lewis beat. Besides, Lewis dropped his belt because he refused to fight Byrd.

Povetkin > Ruddock

Haye > Mercer (a fight Lewis arguably lost).

Lewis has a better resume but its not that there's a huge difference.

However, there IS a HUGE difference between the longevity/dominance between both fighters. And it favours Wlad.

 

Excellent post.

 

As the guy said with the long articulate post, be reasonable here.

So Lennox is some ATG that cannot be touched? But a guy who is 62-3 or whatever he is, and has probably lost a total of 10 rounds in the last 11 years is "not even close"? Give me a break. Wlad is one of the all time greats and people can't stand it because he is so dominant.

Personally, I think a lot of stock is put into Lennox's wins against Tyson and Holyfield when they were both past it. Don't get me wrong, Lennox is one of the greats but come on now. There is a feasible argument to have Wlad ahead of him.

 

Of course there is. I think that's why the haters get so butt hurt over this comparison, because they know Wlad is at or ahead of Lewis.

 

:thumbsup

That's right, there isn't much distance between them, they are both great fighters.

In my opinion Lennox's best wins are not 2002 Tyson and 1999 Holyfield. Both were 10 years past their primes. His best wins imo are Vitali Klitschko, Mercer and Golota. Of those three wins, two were controversial. Wlad's wins over Byrd, Haye and Povetkin are just a step below (in fact, Byrd actually beat Vitali and Povetkin could beat Golota). But then you have to add into the equation some facts like longevity (Wlad's 16 years at the top versus Lennox's 11 years), dominance (Wlad has been unbeaten and barely lost a round since 2004, doubling Lennox's numbers) and total fights (65 vs. 45). Besides, Wlad fought more styles, southpaws, etc. At the end, they are very close indeed.

If quality of beaten fighters was the only important factor, Joe Frazier would be the #1 or #2 of all time. Dominance is clearly an important factor and that's why Louis/Lewis/Holmes generally rank ahead of Frazier.

 

Some of these people just can't use common sense. You can't diminish Wlad's record and pump up Lewis's at the same time when Wlad Klitschko was a major player in Lewis's era as well as having many common opponents, it's absurd reasoning.

 

its already been pointed out rahman was well shot vs k bros, whislt leiws destoeryed prime rahman.

why you bother trying to raise a failed point?

once again kliturd self destructs...whilst claiming the OP is wrong. awesome stuff.

 

If Wlad beats Fury right now it does very little for his ATG standing. Right now Fury is just another mandatory defense, nothing special.

Of course that can change over time if Fury later in his career dominates the division and shows his worth. Much like Lewis' victory of Vitali increased in value as Vitali was the #1 boxer for a couple years after Lewis retired.

 

vitali cunningly won by adhereing to the nevertriedbefore plan of letting his opponent rip his eye out.

another k bros first.