Wladimir Klitschko has a very good resume..where does it rate in history

1. Louis-Holmes

If it were purely based on old age losses, I would rate Louis higher, but he also lost badly to Schmeling in 1936. In fairness to Louis, Holmes was losing at that age to Nick Wells, so it is not a completely clear choice and I might change my mind about this some day. Joe did seem pretty much a complete fighter by 22 with victories banked against the likes of Baer, Carnera, Uzcudun, Ratzleff, etc. and so ironically I hold the loss against him.

2. Lewis-Liston

Can't argue with your point, but Lewis' loss to Rahman came at 36, only a year younger than Liston was when he lost to Martin. Why should Liston get a pass for the Martin fight if Lewis doesn't for Rahman? Liston also lost an early one to Marshall.

Both these cases are similar. Joe Louis and Lennox Lewis were top fighters longer and so losses at an early age (Louis) or at an old age (Lewis) are held against them while someone like Liston gets a pass.

3. "It is interesting that you consider Vitali a contender for top ten status"

He doesn't make my top ten but I thought I would be open-minded and include him. Serves me right.

4. Harry Wills

"Too complex" about sums it up. I see him as a strong top ten candidate but I would have to really do research to evaluate his early losses. The Sharkey and Uzcudun losses doen't mean that much.

 

Do you really think Liston was 37 when he lost to Martin?
I think Wills is overrated his rep is based on his wins over a 5'7'' man whose best weight was in the 170's.

 

I rate Wlad Klit at about # 13 on my ATG list of heavies...... As far as Europe goes, well, he is definately top-3 there....... He's the goods.......

MR.BILL:good

 

I'd guess Liston was anywhere from age 37 up to as high as age 41..... Nothing more or less.......

MR.BILL:deal

 

"intuition comes into play here"

My wife has all the intuition in our family. She defers to my judgement on investments, though.

 

Okay.

One thing, though, Do you think Lewis would have lost twice and as badly to Ali if he had fought him at the same age as Liston did? I doubt it.

You are penalizing Lewis for fighting well into old age, aren't you?

 

Trying to rate Champions from different eras is ultimately fairly ridiculous, but we continue to do it because, it is irresistable and so much fun.
However , we shouldn't take it too seriously .

My partner is smarter than me,[ not difficult] , so I defer to her on financial matters.

 

My wife is certainly smarter than me. I just think she doesn't want to be bothered and so let's me play around in the market as long as I manage decently.

On rating champions--I think we can make fairly lucid judgements on how well champions did against the competition of their own eras. Who would jump eras, especially when all the variables such as rules, nutrition, supplements, etc are taken into account I think is pretty much guesswork, but fun is fun and needs no defense.

 

We have common ground !!!!:good

 

Couldn't agree more. It's hard enough to pick two fighters competing in the same era (just look at the precision on this forum concerning Pac-DLH, Pac-Hatton and even PBF-Mosley), but if you factor in the differences between eras it becomes plain impossible.

If Ali from 66-67 got transported to today and got beat by Wlad, I would not be chocked. But I still consider Ali the greater HW by some distance.

 

1. How could you possibly make an argument the Liston who fought Martin was the same as the Lennox who fought Rahman? Watch the films, Liston was far past his prime. His reflexes were gone, he had a tire around his midsection. All he had left was his power. Sonny had been noticeably past his prime for Some Time. lennox was coming off career performances against Tua, Grant, and would go on to post a legacy defining dominant win over Tyson AFTER the rahman fights. He would also kayo rahman in possibly the best combination he had ever thrown. There is strong evidence to suggest Lennox was in his prime when he fought Rahman. There is also strong evidence to suggest Liston was nearly shot when he fought Martin.


2. I see you give Harry Wills a free pass for his fights with Sharkey and Uzcuden, yet not with Liston against martin? I think it's amazing a washed up liston was still able to knockdown and outbox the top 10 rated martin for as long as he did.



I think the big difference between Lennox and Liston is Liston fought the best fighters of his generation in their primes, while lennox fought them when they were well past there primes.

 

Charles Liston is not listed as being born yet in the 1930 census. The census seems to me the best evidence. A 1932 birth date seems likely.

 

Sonny could be seen calling his "older" brother Charles. There is the possibility he and his brother switched identities. With 25 children, a extremely busy, confused, southern mother could easily mix up one of her kids. especially with how unorganized paperwork was back then, compared to today.