Wladimir Klitschko's legacy without smaller heavyweights?

Not sure if your referring to my "is size important thread" but, 1. I think cruiserweight should be extended to 210, maybe or maybe not renamed heavyweight with unlimited division named super heavyweight. The only person Wlad faced as champ below 210 was 209 Chambers, who easily could have made the weight. 2. Good point to the extent that smaller hw's are still top contenders. But a. even the shorter hw's are generally much heavier than 30+ years ago and b for the last 30 years the dominant champs have been both heavier and taller, much as the most dominant performers in other sports, signaling a generalized shift overall. c of Wlad 23 successful belt defenses, 8 of them were against hw's 6'4.5 or higher, a rate of over 1/3rd, a significantly higher rate than any champ with 4 or more defenses before 1990, again signaling an overall increase in height commiserate with other sports.

So, your thread still fails in the overall notion its trying to disprove, even if it makes a valid point that smaller hw's still have a place in the modern hw division.

 

Sure, if someone is standing still. So could a 160 pound boxer under those circumstances. But Vitali was stopped only by injury from a smaller hw and Wlad was only ko'd by 6'2 225 or heavier hw's, and before he got his act together. Realistically, barring a virtually unattainable skill inbalance, a top 6'1 200 pound heavyweight is not koing a 6'5 240 pound top hw. That's one of the reasons there are essentially no 205 or lower hw's fighting for hw titles in the last 20 years.

 

so he hadn't got his act together by the age of 27 and had won a title?

You mean hes a slow learner with some kind of learning disability, that's the only thing you can mean.

I disagree, hes not got learning disability.

 

about 15 lbs of corries weight was fat, so corrie effectively was close to a 200 lb fighter without it.

the excess fat didn't make him a better boxer, it made him worse.


a 205 lb super trim sanders would have koed wlad even faster, not slower like your stupid theory thinks.

 

more losses huh? to whom?

 

From the king of learning disabilities, I guess you would know. Are you proud to be one of maybe three people alive who haven't come to terms with the fact the Wlad of today is better than the Wlad of the era he lost three times in?

 

Not remotely true. First, I wasn't talking about Sanders, who was a true SHW, at over 6'4 and 225+. And his bulk worked well on him, he was better as a sneaky counterpuncher with more sand in his punches than an athletic boxer (still would put him around 220 though).

 

Yeah, I'm not quite sure the logic involved that says he gets more losses by narrowing his competition?

 

Sanders at his lightest was 215 and a bean pole. When he fought Wlad he was ~230 iirc

 

Why not simply have a thread then that goes along the lines of " Most of the best modern heavyweights in the world generally aren't that big, contrary to popular belief". Does seem like this was slanted to slate Wlad.

 

I think if Wlad fought men under 200 pounds, he'd be even more dominant, and something tragic could happen to his opponents.

 

The reality is 3 of those fighters are 225 which is a super HW really and the rest below and even two 210 pounders...imagine Wlad fighting less skilled guys that weight that he beat? just because two highly gifted fighters at 210 were the case at one point,it Simply doesn't work!


I don't understand with the current HW rankings and only one guy remotely under 220 is listed how anyone thinks smaller fighters are better for him? And hes never lost to anyone under 220? Even guys like giant WACH challenged him more just based on applying pressure to him and making him actually work,he also hit Wlad with a monster right hand that shook him briefly in round 5...when did anyone on that list do something like that? :nut

 

because that's a statement about popular belief, as opposed to asking for peoples beliefs.

 

why not remotely true, when he made 215 once?

that means you are arguing over 15lbs, when the heavier sanders who was MUCH WORSE SHAPE and WORST FORM EVER also counts against you.


He's better at 215, end of. Since the OP is talking about those just over 200, the difference is perhaps 10 lbs, notwithstanding sanders was in his worst form at 37 at near 230lbs, much less than his best form.

Also you haven't told me if you think wlad had some sort of learning disability that meant he needed to sort out his learning of the game at age 28.

 

Wow, you contradict yourself and just don't stop. Answers above.