Wlad's ko loss to Brewster = proof of glass jaw?

Wlad fought a horrid style in the first Brewster fight. He should have took his time and wore Brewster out. Instead of trying to get the KO at first sight.

 

Thats what he was trying to do except both Brewster and the ref made him fight. Brewster applied pressure and the ref refused to allow him clinch- box like he normally does.

Going for a quick ko isn't what he was trying to do at all. You take away his illegal huggy tactics and he'd have a torrid time with just about anybody.

 

More Dino BS ^

Wlad didn't use "illegal huggy tactics" against guys like Wach and Chagaev and he beat the holy hell out of them.

 

Just curious - do you judge the 60's and 70's in the same light when you compare them to the pre-WWII eras?

 

Per your first statement, what era was significantly better in the division?

Per your second contention, those parents that will be reluctant to let their boys box were never the parents from which boxing culled its talents.

 

Joe Frazier had an excellent chin. The myth he didn't is simply revisited by the unknowledgeable .. try taking shots half blind by any heavyweight as a swarmer and see how it goes .. Wlad had a shaky chin compounded by stamina problems .. people seem to forget in addition to being blown out by Sanders and his collapse against Brewster and his gutsy three knockdown off the floor survival win vs Peter the first time he was also stopped by Ross Puritty and almost stopped by Danell Nicholson (with a ref's help) .... Wlad learned post Brewster a whole other way of fighting, utilizing his exceptional size and skills in a very cautious, safety first manner .. lad may be the best two handed power puncher who ever lived at heavyweight but could not ever go balls to the wall because his chin was always a liability ..

 

This has always been my take onWlad,but I think he redeemed himself somewhat in the Joshua fight.

 

Frazier did have a better chin than wlad, but he still got destroyed by Foreman which makes his chin suspicious vs big bangers

 

Foreman is the strongest and possibly the hardest hitting heavyweight in history .. Frazier was not only past his best but nearly blind in one eye and kept getting up .. Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano, Muhammad Ali ( who was dropped by Banks and Cooper ), Larry Holmes, Riddick Bowe, Evander Holyfield, Lennox Lewis and Wlad Klitschko would have all been floored if hit by the shots .. maybe a Chuvalo, a Mercer or a McCall might have survived the floor but still been stopped ..

Frazier took the bombs of Quarry (Earnie Shavers didn't ) , Bonavena in 26 of 27 rounds , of Ali (Liston, Lyle, Bonavena and Foreman didn't) and Chuvalo (Quarry didn't ) .. he was a small ( for a heavyweight ) swarmer nearly half blind. His chin and his accomplishments were astonishing all things considered.

 

I agree with some of the things you said, but I'm not sure he could survive best shots from punchers like Morrison, Ruddock, Tua etc..

 

From late 1930's to the mid 1990's in my opinion were the best yrs for heavyweight boxing and boxing in general , from about 1964, until the early-mid nineties being the absolute best for heavyweights. The best fighters may have been "culled" from the environments your hinting at but boxing was a major college sport until the early sixities , those environments were not the typical environment that most associate with men that boxed, yet most major colleges had a program. In this era of mass media even poorer families learn about the physical dangers of contact sports, so amateur boxing is not close to what it used to be in this country (when was the last time an American team dominated the Olympics?) A prime indicator is how bad the amateur program has been for yrs. The talent pool is just not their. It's beginning to be seen now in pee wee through high school level football. Parents are not allowing their children to play contact sports in anymore due to the dangers.....

 

Not too many fighters would .. it is a combo of enduring and not getting teed off on ..

 

I don't buy that Joe had a better chin on an absolute basis at all. On a P4P basis? I could see the case for it.

Here's why I can't agree that Joe had a better chin on an absolute basis: He fought fewer total fights, many fewer fights against big men, and fought fewer punchers than Wlad did.

Frazier had 37 pro fights. 7 of them were against fighters 220 or higher.

Wlad had 69 pro fights. 57 of them were against fighters 220 or higher.

So, despite having 32 more total fights and 50 more fights vs heavier fighters than Joe, Wlad was stopped a grand total of one more time than Frazier. Yes, he fought a more defensive style (especially post-Sdunek), but I'm willing to cut him a break for that since his career longevity was essentially twice what Joe's was (significantly more fights, pro for 20+ years), and he was doing it against larger fighters.

 

frazier easily excelled wlad chinwise. wtf. this is not even debatable.

 

Wlad was not blind in one eye, was not a swarmer, was a grab and clinch fighter and and to his credit was hit far less than Frazier .. I think both H2H and without question P4P Frazier had a much better chin. Wlad changed his entire style post Brewster to factor for the chin and it was what propelled him to his success .. it was often not pretty like seeing the giant Wlad fight such a gun-shy fight against such a smaller David Haye but he won.