Wladimir Klitschko Retires - Where Does He Rank ?

This would have been me. I fully understand the complications and it would be totally unfair of me to say they should have fought however i have to judge accordingly.

 

This is why i can't take too much of the length dominance into account. While others may not have faced the second best (and we could easily be talking best (Vitali) on a H2H match) i am sure they didn't have such a shadow hanging over them for so long. We are talking a lot of years.

"If" Vitali wasn't kin, or if they somehow got it on a Wlad victory, even by competitive decision would have put him in my ten i reckon.

It's not only unfortunate for them, but for boxing. The possibilities are endless. Two big guys that together basically dominated their entire era once things fell into place. It would have been a top match. They could have even put forth a top shelf trilogy and both came out better off historically. The thing is we will never know.

 

Even at an advanced age, the losses against Fury and Joshua showed Wlad's limitations: inability to fight on the inside, reluctancy to engage because of his glass chin.

 

If he'd beat Vitaly he'd probably be right after Ali and Louis for me. Right now I have Holmes there, who didn't face contemporary contenders like Coetzee, Page, Thomas, Dokes and didn't rematch Norton, Witherspoon and Williams. Otherwise they're pretty close in terms of wins in title fights and against ranked opp, except that Wlad was even more dominant in his wins. The fact that Holmes had no losses in his physical prime gives him the spot ahead of Wlad imo.

 

He'd be higher up that's for sure. It would indeed be tight between he and Holmes. If he lost however........

 

If he lost after Vitaly hade made his comeback, and he himself was at his peak, it would bump him down, absolutely.

But the thing is, not many have decisively beat the best of their era.

Johnson victories over a very green Langford and a shot Jeffries mean little to me, even though it was no fault of Johnson's that he didn't get to face a prime Jeffries.

Dempsey, well we all know that story...

Liston 0-2 against Ali.

Frazier 1-2 against Ali, 0-2 against Foreman

Foreman 0-1 against Ali

Tyson 0-2 against Holyfield

Holy 2-0 against Tyson, but also 1-2 against Bowe

 

Three of those four have the common denominator of Ali. This is why he is for most the greatest heavyweight ever. One can have a losing record against Ali and still sit well inside the top 10. It's a negative but no-where near as bad as say losing to someone outside the 10.

Holyfield and Tyson are commonly 8-12 so they lose spots for their indescretions. These are some of the reasons they don't sit top 5.

 

True. But when I look at the top 5, there is only really Holmes, Ali and Louis that equal or better Wlad in terms of wins in title fights and against ranked opp. And those that don't also generally have several of the negatives on their record that Wlad has on his. That's why I can't see anyone besides Holmes, Ali and Louis that I think is clearly above. And only Louis and Ali inarguably so.

 

he cracks top twenty for sure, on longevity and management and familial ownership of the titles, plus eventually and very briefly being as close to undisputed and you can be.

but you have to put all the other longer reigning undisputed ahead of him.

 

Why? Undisputed doesn't mean you fought better completion. For example, Jack Johnson was a champion for a while, but he had mediocre results, skirted the best challenges out there, and lost to the first formidable opponent he faced.

Burns made a few title defenses. No one thinks he was that good either.

In the ring together, Wlad would dust Johnson or Burns.

 

No. It is the fact that he has a better resume. Beat better oppponents and did not get knocked out in his prime.He also did better at an advanced age (over 40), beating Mercer and losing in a very close fight at age 45 years against McCall.

 

because they proved they could hold the title longer. as soon as wlad won other titles, he was on the road to consecutive losses. why is this an issue for you?

why, becos u write it makes it so? flop, boxing is not fiction.

 

i tihnk wlad would show how clumsy vitali was, up until he gets tapped out by vits.

 

You partly repeated what I said there, but I disagree that he beat better opponents. An aging Norton in a very close fight would be the best and I don't think he's a level above the best Wlad beat. And Wlad beat his best opponents easily until he got old.

I agree that old Holmes exploits also is a plus when comparing him to Wlad. And, as I said, I have Holmes clearly above Wlad.