Wlad in the era of Ali,Foreman,Frazier...still the best?

Era you're talking the 70's so Id say Wlad's size would be very problematic for a 70's Ali.....Wlad could beat him.
Wlad would do to Frazier what Foreman did.

Foreman and Wlad would have good fights but foremans power would be too much (I think)....hed get the better of a trilogy, lets put it that way.

 

That's the standard excuse for all of Mikey's losses :| he was past his prime. Yeah he was past his prime all right. His prime was like how long? A few years. I've seen nearly all of MTs fights - the good, bad, and ugly. Man, why don't you relax.

 

I dont think Wlad would be able to outfox the version of Ali around 66 or 67.......from 71 to 74 i think he would have beat him 2 out of the three.

Past 74 i think Wlad has a good chance of beating him.

Though this only Wlad now at his best..

 

:rofl

Another nut-licking, hysterical Wlad thread.

I guess we can count on having at least one per week. :verysad


Wlad would be destroyed by ALL of these guys. Period, end of story... the fat lady IS singing. :yep

 

Scuse me - you are a WW2 guru :roll: Based on your other posts and heavy biases, I doubt your reasoning skills are too sharp. I had some family involved in WW2 too. So what? You don't have to have had family in WW2 to know much about it. There's things called books and documentaries. If you have an interest, you can learn very much.

Everybody knows Manstein would have made better decisions than AH. But I doubt even he could have saved the EF by late '43. Forget WA production - by mid war Soviets were churning out many more tanks, arty, fighters, bombers than Germany and their weak allies. Tell me more pearls of wisdom about the EF :-(

 

Really? You can make an argument Norton Kicked Alis ass all three times.
And Wlad would have done to Norton what Shavers, Foreman and Cooney did to him.

Frazier might (MIGHT) get a left hook in and do a Corry Sanders on him, but thats unlikely.

The aggressive Foreman that beat Norton and Frazier beats Wlad.
The tentative one who lost to Jimmy Young doesnt.

 

How about the Foreman that fought Young against the WALD that fought Ibragimov :huh

 

you should have been around here 5 years ago when people were saying both klitschko's could dominate any era ever.

 

Its not much better now.

Iron Duke recently said Wlad would "easily" beat George Foreman (by clinching apparently).

Widdow maker also calimed Wlad would KO Lewis in a slugfest.

They are as deranged as ever. :good

 

Agreed, the Wlad nuthugging madness most stop. Foreman would expose Wlads weak chin in less than 4, Lewis would probably knock him out in the 3rd or 4th with a uppercut on the inside, where Wlad has no offense and dont know what it feels like to be on the inside with a stronger man. Wlad just looks good, because everyone else is so bad, Wlad would not be a top 5 fighter if his prime was in the 90's.

 

Wlad would not even be in boxing during that era. Ali would have mentally abused him so bad he would have **** himself.

 

Wow this stupid thread is still alive....and I thought it was a joke at first...

I mean, its definately a joke, but too bad everyone isnt in on it.

 

No, it IS cherry picking. When you pick one fight that goes against the regular grain of the usual, you're cherry-picking. The Young fight came at a time when George was still suffering from the devastating loss of confidence after losing to Ali.

The pre-Ali Foreman would probably blow out Young quicker than he did Norton.

It's just as much cherry-picking as when the Klit-haters seize on the Sanders fight and try to characterize Wlad's career based on a loss to a 'golf-pro.'

Why? Are you unfamiliar with the concept ?

You clearly need to be lectured on circular reasoning too. My point was, that your statement, (

This content is protected

) while true, meant nothing. In other words my point was: What's YOUR point ?

Fair enough. It comes down to opinion. That's the first piece of your reply that's made any sense.

IMO, this is a pick'em fight. 2 out of 4.

Well if you read some of my earlier posts defending BOTH Klitschko brothers, you wouldn't have to speculate. Just last night, one Suge White was calling me a Klit-ite
(SEE: http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52119&page=3)

I call such posts bull****, but again, you're cominhg up a little short on logic. How am I responsible for the rantings of the Klit-haters who say such things ? When I see them I respond, if I think it will do any good, though usually the haters are no more amenable to reason than the wild-eyed Klitschko fanatics.

Lame to you because you didn't catch on. You need to get a sarcasm meter, and turn it on.

The Napoleon remark was in response to your comment:

This content is protected

To summarize for you, I'm a fan of both Klitschkos as can easily be determined by reading my previous posts on them. I believe I am a realistic fan. That includes ranking them as the two best current heavywts today (assuming Vitali hasn't faded during his layoff).

But that realism does not extend to the borderline preposterous position of some Klitschko fans who maintain that Wlad is the best or second best heavywt ever. He would lose , IMO, to Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Tyson and Lewis, among others. (He would lose to Vitali too !)

Neither Klitschko is an alltime top 10, at least not yet.

So it's embarrassing to hear some of these outlandish claims.

Straightforword enough, I think.

 

Can we rename this thread to "The Ukraine and WWII", then send it to the lounge? I mean seriously, its transformation absolutely brutalizes its premise...