Wlad Klitschko's top ten...

Povetkin, Chagaev, Sultan, Haye... top tier operators. "Great' can be subjective.

 

I’m pretty sure Norton and Quarry would’ve been lumped right in with them if they were born later.

 

You could certainly be correct but it is a fact not in evidence so we don't know for sure. We only know they weren't great.

 

Same is true of Holmes, Tyson*, Foreman (other than beating Frazier due to size), Liston (other than wins over vulnerable Patterson), Patterson, Dempsey…the list goes on. Marciano beat a bunch of old men.


*Beat a wrong weightclass Michael Spinks and aging Holmes

 

I don't disagree. That's why greatness built on important wins at heavyweight is so rare. I wasn't knocking Wlad at all. I was just pointing out the way his greatness was built is more noticeable when you list his wins.

 

Pretty much.

Looking at this list it's clear Wladmir never beat a great fighter. You could maybe argue Byrd, Haye, or Povetkin were "good" fighters tho. Upper B+ or A- level at their best and Wladmir did beat good versions of them.

The rest of the list is pretty mid even by that era's standards.

 

I think Povetkin was a slight cut above those guys but perhaps not by much. Haye didn’t impress me at heavyweight. Hardly did anything there. And the way he fought Wlad was underwhelming

 

Greatness is obvious and clear as day. You don't have to convince someone when a boxer is a great boxer.

 

Was Arturo Gatti "great"? Was Riddick Bowe "great"? Was Joe Calzaghe "great"? Was Jersey Joe Walcott "great"? Was Andre Ward "great"? Was Terry Norris "great"?

For damn sure, Wlad Klitschko was great.

 

True, it can be understood differently. I took it as an potential ATG, so fighters We could see mentioned among 10-15-20 greatest heavyweights of all time.

Haye might've won a legitimate title - but We've seen He didn't have a health for longevity. Chagaev struggled with fighters like Skelton and past-prime Ruiz. Ibragimov was tricky, but had his limitations and hasn't beaten anyone particulary impressive before Klitschko unification at 33.

Povetkin would probably have the best shot of becoming the long-reigning champion without Wlad around.

 

David Haye without the Wlad loss was on the cusp of greatness with wins over an end of career Valuev , end of career John Ruiz and Derrick Chisora.

Chagaev if he wasn't beaten by Wlad would be inducted into the hall of fame for his win over end of career Kali Meehan , Matt Skelton , Micheal Sprott.
You could argue Povetkin prevented Chagaev from achieving greatness.

Sam Peter was destined for greatness by beating a 40 year old pig bellied James Toney in a rematch after getting schooled in the first one.

Harrold Scorniers victim Ray Astin scuppered Iggy's path to greatness by flooring him and fighting him to a draw.

 

There's my dude. I was waiting for you.

By my calculations, Wlad controlled the heavyweight division for almost 8% of its existence at the time of his domination, without the help of a World War to freeze activity. GOAT.

 

I'd say:

Chris Byrd I (this was his best win) you can go 1 or 2.
Povetkin (this was his 2nd best win)

Everybody else you can change the order

Ibragimov (he retired him, he didn't even see the need to fight again after this)
Chagaev (his first loss, didn't mean much in America but it did in Europe)
Calvin Brock (Manny Steward was having a hissy fit with Wlad's performance in that fight, a lot of people seem to forget)
McCline (was getting some serious push by HBO at the time)
Peter 1 (prime monster that HBO was pushing, even the on air lead up they were expecting Wlad to lose)
Thompson 1 (Thompson was very solid)
Eddie Chambers (people forget Eddie had a crazy run with Guinn, Brock, Peter, Dimetrenko, and a close as hell fight with Povetkin)
Pulev (not great but definitely top 10)

Some people added Mercer, Haye and Lamon Brewster and nah.............Mercer was old, Haye was a miserable performance by both and Brewster was an even lesser fighter than when Ettienne and Charles freakin Shufford beat him.

 

You misunderstood. If course Wlad was great.

I was responding to you suggesting some of his opponents were great because greatness is subjective. You could maybe argue Byrd or Povetkin were somewhat great, but they weren't truly great fighters imo. Wladmir didn't beat any great fighters and greatness is something obvious you wouldn't need to make a case for.

 

You misunderstood. Of course Wlad was great.

I was responding to you suggesting some of his opponents were great because greatness is subjective. You could maybe argue Byrd or Povetkin were somewhat great, but they weren't truly great fighters imo. Wladmir didn't beat any great fighters and greatness is something obvious you wouldn't need to make a case for.