Wladamir Klitschko's height is his biggest weapon...

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by swedeone, Oct 23, 2007.


  1. mike464

    mike464 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,846
    0
    Sep 10, 2005
    So you think his height is his biggest asset?
     
  2. PolishPummler

    PolishPummler Obsessed with Boxing banned

    19,752
    4
    Oct 15, 2005
    One of.
     
  3. swedeone

    swedeone Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,227
    3
    Dec 4, 2004

    :lol:

    You sound like a fool, saying that. I'm sorry but anyone that doesn't agree that Wlad's height has a lot to do with his success... especially when seeing him fight guys usually 7" shorter than him, is ludacris. Again, if you read my post more clearly, you would have seen that I said he has skills. I get that. My point is on his height. Try and comment on topic please before you blatantly spout off. :hi:
     
  4. swedeone

    swedeone Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,227
    3
    Dec 4, 2004
    Now I know many of you have seen Wlad more than I have (7 times or so), so are really trying to tell me that if Wlad was 6'1 or so, like most other HW's, that he would be the same fighter? NO WAY.

    The reason no one can get to Wlad is mostly because they can't get inside. That's the absolute best place to get a much taller man. His height and reach are so advantageous that it beomes a huge weapon for him. I mean, come on... everyone can see that.

    Take a look at his height and reach compared to some of the "Top 20" guys:

    Wladamir Klitschko - Height: 6'7" Reach: 81"

    This content is protected






     
  5. 41fever

    41fever Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,811
    0
    Jul 16, 2005
    Of course his size is a big factor. If BYRD was his size he would of lost UD. Wladdy has ridiculous power and long reach, trouble for anyone, especially little guys
     
  6. RUSKULL

    RUSKULL Loyal Member banned

    30,315
    8
    Dec 17, 2004
    According to your logic Tony Thompson should be just as good as Wlad then right? Bad logic.
     
  7. maciek4

    maciek4 Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,407
    1
    Jul 24, 2004
    McBride is tall and big too.
     
  8. RUSKULL

    RUSKULL Loyal Member banned

    30,315
    8
    Dec 17, 2004
    So by your logic Tony Thompson should be just as good as Wlad then right? Bad logic. Look what happened to Ray Austin who was about the same height & with similar reach, he was KTFO in 2.
     
  9. RUSKULL

    RUSKULL Loyal Member banned

    30,315
    8
    Dec 17, 2004
    Exactly, same bull**** logic. McBride doesn't have the skills to compete with the likes of Wlad.

    Lance Whitaker comes to mind as well....................
     
  10. Punisher33

    Punisher33 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    17,407
    8
    Oct 8, 2007
    His reach is a bigger asset in my opinion, his jab like Rahmans is so good because they could practically hit you from side of the ring to the other. Trying to get inside on Wlad is extremely hard because of his jab, not his hieght.

    There are advantages to being taller and to being shorter, in the end skills and mental fortitude overcome any physical adavantage IMO.
     
  11. DoumB

    DoumB HOYA KO1 PRESSCOT Full Member

    1,491
    0
    Sep 18, 2006
    I think we cannont judge him basing on that, if he wasnt that big, he wouldnt fight tall, he would adopt another style, this is irrevelant just like if Tyson wasnt short, this leads us no where
     
  12. RDJ

    RDJ Boxing Junkie banned

    13,158
    8
    Sep 27, 2005
    Wlad had an uppercut, Steward took it from him. Just like his devastating left hook.
     
  13. RUSKULL

    RUSKULL Loyal Member banned

    30,315
    8
    Dec 17, 2004
    Uppercuts do tend to leave the fighter open to counter punches especially if the uppercut misses................
     
  14. RDJ

    RDJ Boxing Junkie banned

    13,158
    8
    Sep 27, 2005
    Only if you throw wide uppercuts from long range.
     
  15. dragosuhail

    dragosuhail Active Member Full Member

    1,270
    0
    Apr 12, 2007
    wlad still has an uppercut. he just uses it less now since he's improved on his 1-2 and footwork even more so to the point were most times the opponent can't get inside.

    in fact didn't wlad use an uppercut against brewster in their rematch when lamon was up against the ropes? i thought someone said it broke lamon's jaw with that uppercut. in the 5th round i think it was.

    wladimir uses his uppercut when it's the perfect time for it. and will never be a fighter who throws a massive uppercut from outside leaving himself open.

    like when he pinned brewster against the ropes and stayed really close to him. it'll be a short close uppercut with no room for the opponent to counter.

    and his hook is still there. the main reason we dont see it that much is yes, his style has been changed a bit by steward, but the other reason is if something is working for ya, why change it?

    if wladimir's 1-2 can dominate and ko the majority of opponents, then he'll continue to use it until he finds a foe which is doesn't work against. i suspect if he rematches peter he will use more hooks and uppercuts when in clinching range.

    look at brock's fight with wlad. the straight right was not working so wladimir used a looping right hand to get over brocks defense. we dont see that punch often, but when needed he brings it out of the toolbox.

    some fighters like to shoeshine with a million different angles and such, but at the end of the day you do what it takes to win :good