This guy has presided over the weakest division in boxing history. Likely P4P at that and he's rated on here like a real ATG. You aren't an ATG for defeating a bunch of C level guys in non-impressive style where you were obviously afraid to get hit. Povetkin for example is highly rated fighter for HW, but in real boxing skills and ability(compared to former era HWs), he's a C level fighter. Wladimir, as we know, held so much in that fight that a DQ was merited and he did so because Povetkin would have been dangerous otherwise. Povetkin, because he lacks that X factor of a special fighter, permitted it to happen without responding with extremely rough tactics like a top HW would have in a former era. That was so disgraceful in fact that I have never seen anything of that sort not attaining a DQ or extreme criticism. And yet, you have fans on here congratulating it for merely getting a W. A W is not a W, there's many different variables that go into rating ability, the substantial nature of a W, the impressiveness and so on.... and that was nonsense and kind of wrapped up everything about the Wladimir Klitschko HW era in 1 fight. Other than that you have another fight with David Haye, in which Haye deserves all the more criticism for that effort after he talked for so long. But again you have Wladimir overly cautious, afraid to get hit(Haye the same)and it went the distance with Wladimir getting stunned by a Haye punch in round 12. So the smallish HW with a glass jaw of his own lasted 12 in that supposed super fight and did manage to sting him once and you have people on here saying that smaller HWs in the past couldn't "possibly" compete with the elite hulking machines that are the Klitschko's. Given especially that smaller HWs like Holyfield and Louis were leagues and leagues above Haye in nearly every intangible category, we can put that stupidity to rest. Other than that we have Ws over Sam Peter in unimpressive fashion where he was floored 3 times and please remember that people on here say Foreman would be outboxed by Wladimir.... Eddie Chambers.... Calvin Brock... Tony Thompson 2x.... Ibragimov.... Brewster.... Bunch of limited fighters with limited athletic ability and even more limited skill sets. Which Wladimir himself has a limited skill set. Ls to Brewster, Sanders as we know... Purrity isnt worth a mention since it was so early and due to exhaustion. So yes, he's won a lot, but against who and how did the fighter win? Who and How are the most important factors. Not an ATG HW. Not a P4P fighter and not close to the vaunted top 10 HW list. He or his brother. Though his brother deserves credit as a good HW, where as Wladimir's performances have ranged from boring, to unimpressive and in the latest instance - downright disgraceful. :deal
He is ATG no doubt just based on his longevity on top, BUT and for me this is huge he never faced second best(possibly the best) HW of his time and thats Vitali. It is unfortunate that they are brothers but he did not prove he is better than Vitali, he has better record but it aint shining one not a single really great defining win (something like ALi vs Formeman, Liston, Frazier). Simple as this Wlad did not beat best/second best fighter of his time.
Hmm, interesting points, and for the most part I agree, but I feel you have to rate guys based on their era, and the fact that he has dominated over this one is incredible. I usually find myself on the opposing side of Wladimir, but I feel he will be regarded highly as time goes on. Yes his opposition is week compared to the competitive and in shape HW's of the past that hovered around 200lbs and lower. But, he has dominated this one, his most harmful trait will be his boring ass hugfest fights and that he was a complete ***** when it comes to trading blows and actually boxing, and chose to clinch excessively instead. The general fan base will probably have him hovering in top15 or 20 HW's
I think that the brothers will be highly regarded for how they dominated their era. I did, however, half way through the Wlad-Povetkin fight, find myself saying "Why am I still watching this?"
Right, but what I'm suggesting is - Can we consider that to be really "dominating"? Is a W simply a W? Sure the opponents didn't have the answers to get the Ws, but the guy just looks so vulnerable in there always and we all here agree it's the weakest era of HWs. Can you be an ATG looking vulnerable in wide points wins against limited opposition that include - excessive holding, limited use of technique and the absolute fear of getting hit. And knowing that it wouldn't fly against other great fighters. I don't think so. To be great you kind of have to be great and beat great. :/
Vitali can be excluded from this because we've seen him actually fight when it was necessary to do so. Don't want to discuss the age old Lewis fight, but Wladimir wouldn't have been in a battle with Lewis like that trading blows even if it meant to get the W. Vitali was willing and didn't get the W, but had the heart to do so. So, different league there.
Perhaps the oppositoin only looks weak because Wlad is so dominant. I don't care if you find stiffs it takes a lot of skill, dedication and talent to go undeafeated for over a decade. He's also overcome incredible obstacles after his two losses in 4 fights 10 years ago he was one more loss away from his career becoming irrevelant(over) to come back from that should be admired. Any boxer would tell you the same. He also has an extensive amateur pedigree and is an Olympic Champion. Am I fan of his style no, it's cautious and is boring. But it is effective and Dominant. He hasn't come close to defeat in Years and his wins are more dominant than most ATGS. When an opponent reaches the final bell there isn't even the chance of a robbery taking place because the fight is so lopsided. Many All TIme greats struggled and got the benefit of blind judges in fights that Wlad doesn't even have to worry about.
You can't really convince me that there's been nothing but C-class heavyweights for nearly a decade. Being heavyweight champion of the world is too prestigious and there's too much global competition for that spot to think the division could have such a dry spell for that long. It just flies in the face of reality- there's more foreign competition than ever before and boxing's as diverse as it's ever been, but yet, the Heavyweight division is at an all time low talent-wise? Just doesn't add up. I'd buy that the top contenders don't face off against each other nearly as much as they should, but that's more of a matchmaking issue than a talent one. Also, Wlad's not just scraping by in his W's- he doesn't lose rounds. That's dominance.
Vladimir Klitschko is the best heavyweight fighting today period. He keeps on beating the haters heroes which is the reason they hate him and lie about him so much. The Klitschko haters believe that Wilder is the greatest heavyweight of all time. LOL! Vlad will knock Wilder out if they ever fight...........
Don't underrate Wladimir's win over Haye. Holmes lost to a light heavyweight. Tyson lost to a cruiserweight. Wlad has only lost to heavyweights. If you are going to look at dirty tactics you might wants to mention Ali's holding opponent's head back with the arm, George Foreman's pushing (Frazier couldn't get in punching range), Larry Holmes' thumbing the eyes, Tyson's nutpunching and elbows, Evander's headbutting and steroid-taking but since these fighters trace their ancestry back to a different continent you'll just say I beein a *****-ass muhfuger who talkin' whack and tryin' to a keep a brotha down n sheeit. Anyway, Emmanuel Steward (R.I.P) was the source of Wlad's clinching. This is why Lewis did it so much, too. You know it's true. Also, John Ruiz clinched 164 times against Golota without recieving a warning; watch the fight if you don't believe me. This fight took place in the land of the free - under the flag of the red, white, and blue. The ref was American, too. No German corruption to blame here. You are now required to kneel down and kiss the glorious Ukrainian anus of the man who can beat all the so-called top 10 p4p fighters, Wladimir Klitschko (PhD) - your superior and the true king of boxing (his 8-year reign will earn him a much deserved spot in the hall of fame).
I'm just curious, but why hasn't your methodology of rating heavyweights caught on with the boxing mags, websites, ESPN, etc.? Or maybe they just don't buy into propaganda.
Chris Arreola, Bermane Stiverne, Tyson Fury.... Most athletic, most skilled, best trained... Original post on point. /endthread
1. Holmes lost a disputed decision to an ATG LHW. 2. Tyson lost to an ATG HW when he himself was not in the form that he got his recognition in. 3. Wlad has lost to C level fighters at HW. How do you rate them that way? The skills and ability are poor compared to top fighters in lower weights and top fighters that used to be at HW. If you can't see that, you don't know boxing technique, or are rosey colored glasses.
BoxingX, I understand what you're doing here, but do you think that maybe you come across self righteous and sanctimonious? I think most legit fans want great match-ups, but there will always be a difference of opinions. That difference of opinion shouldn't devolve into, "I am right, and if you don't agree with me your _____". Just my .02.