Where does Wlad rank in HW history?

Name 30 fighters greater than Wlad, dude. Since you are calling Wlad merely a Top 40 fighter! Don't run from it. Answer it or changed your fucked up position.

 

on the basis of being 6'7 250 pounds, pretty much

It's like saying "Michael Nunn would knocked Julio Cesar Chavez into next year" and then offering that as an example of his greatness

If you are even reasonably good and you can't beat guys giving you 6 or 7 inches and 40-50 pounds, then you SUCK

 

define "great"

are we doing a who-beats-who where Wladimir has 50 pound weight advantages and half a foot height advantages over guys from 30 or more years ago?

or are we measuring them by their skills, accomplishments, strengths and weaknesses?

which is it?

There is no doubt in my mind that Joe Louis was about 5 times the fighter Wlad was, but he was also 50 pounds and 5 inches smaller... Wlad beats him, so that means he is greater? Makes no sense

Nobody says this if we are comparing a welterweight to a light heavyweight... somehow this goes out the window when the heavyweights are brought up

Yeah, Joe Louis probably could not beat a roided-up giant, so that makes the roided up giant GREAT???

Fuck that, Joe Louis had courage and fire to go along with his skills... he took a million right hands from Schmeling before he was finally physically left incapable of continuing... He didn't collapse in a heap from exhaustion every time someone forced a hot pace on him

 

Saad Muhammad > Floyd Mayweather

after all, he'd knock him into the stone age, so he is clearly better

 

Achievements + dominance compared with his peers + competition.

Now provide your list of 30 fighters...

 

Strawman!

I gave the definition...now provide your list of 30 fighters.

 

so do we get to accurately reflect the state of his peers and his competition???

In that case, how the fuck can you rate Wlad so highly?

 

Don't be a cunt like TLC

That isnt a strawman, it's a legit issue when discussing this

We arent talking about 10-15 pounds, 2 or 3 inches

we are talking about MASSIVE differences in dimensions

 

We're talking about greatness not head to head. So you harping on size and other shit is merely a distraction....a distraction which I'm not going to let you get away with.

Provide your damned list of 30 heavyweights that were greater than Wlad or change your position to a more realistic one..i.e. Top 20.

 

well if we are throwing head to head out the window then Wlad is clearly not even top 20... lots of heavyweights fought and beat much stiffer competition than he did

 

So then it should be easy for a man as knowlegeable as yourself (I mean that sincerely) to provie a list of 30 heavyweights that you rank above Wlad.

i want to see this list. I'm intrigued.

 

He cant be trusted to knock his own mother into next year, if youve paid any attention whatsoever to his pattern the last several years.

He does get the better of Johansson & Patterson. Schmeling would be interesting. Louis' offense and speed would crumple him like a paper cup, in a 4-round massacre.

 

head to head is ludicrous and impossible to discuss when it comes to ranking boxers in a historical sense. it should be thrown out the window.

it all has to be based on how you did in your era and against the comp of your era.

 

Hmm, everyone seems to have Tyson up near the top of thier lists, he fought in a VERY weak era and was knocked out by a Douglas, who went on to do nothing. Lennon Lewis, also high on a lot of lists also fought in a very weak era and was knocked cold by Hasim Rahman and Oliver McCall.

Just pointing some things out.

 

Agreed. Either it ends up to favoring modern guys too much or it leads to the silly speed advantage right, reach advantage wrong -thinking.

If we go by achievement, I simply don't understand how a guy with this many years of dominance, even during a weak era, could be outside top 20, let alone 30

 

Tyson would be a threat to some of the greats, but his career trajectory is unforgivably weak. People talk about it like 1985-90 was his whole tenure. 1991-2005, taken as a whole, is disgracefully underwhelming, and has to count against him.

 

Tyson was no doubt an all time great talent, but his actual body of work isn't at an all time great level IMO.

 

I already made the distinction between greatness, on one hand, and the fighters Wlad could beat on the other.

Wlad beats Jack Johnson, but Jack Johnson was "greater".

In the meantime, anyone who wants to moan about the size advantages Wlad enjoys need only look at this photo:

 

Chagaev- busted up, floored, stopped. Sam Peter, busted up, floored, knocked out. Eddie Chambers, knocked clean out. OUT. The lightest man there was 209lbs. Joe Louis had some of the slowest feet a heavyweight champ has ever had. If Wlad can handle Haye, who was bigger than Joe and moved much better, then what does he do to Louis? Louis never fought anyone like Wlad, with that jab. The notion that Wlad ends up the same as drinking, whoring, stupid Max Baer is risible. Louis gets wiped.

 

I don't think there is anyone in history that Wlad wouldn't have a legit chance of beating. People tend to fault Wlad for his opponents not wanting to engage, I don't think he's entirely at fault for his boringness. It's not his fault he's so much better than everyone all they can do is try to survive.

 

word.

 

By that criteria everyone suffers. A Prime Joe Louis was knocked out by an old Max Schmeling for instance.

Just pointing that out...

 

word. It's just knee-jerk reactions by the forum elitists. No way can anyone justify Wlad being outside of the top 20. Not possible.

 

Disagree. Tyson's career is the most underrated heavy career in history. He used to be overrated and now everyone has overcompensated.

He cleaned out the division completely in the 80s, beating everyone there was to beat at the time including Spinks and an older Holmes.

Berbick, Thomas, Tubbs, Tucker, Biggs, Bruno, Spinks, Holmes, Williams, Smith all left in his wake. He also beat Ruddock twice at a time when Ruddock was the biggest threat to the division...and also Alex Stewart who was knocking out everyone in his path at the time.

Tyson was dominant, upset loss to Douglas notwithstanding.

He went to jail came back and regained two versions of the Title. Things then went downhill rapidly...but we can't forget is first run as champion and the things he accomplished before and just out of jail.

GREAT heavyweight. Denigrated only because of his latter career personal meltdown.

 

True- to mention nothing of the fact that if Wlad suddenly did get worried, and started swinging, those would be some dangerous punches. It seems daft not to give Wlad at least a punchers chance in some fights. T

 

As it should be, if it happened, it counts. Or does a KO loss only count against modern fighters?

 

That is a pretty average list of guys there, other than Spinks who was a LHW and Holmes who was old as dirt. Pretty comparable to the guys Wlad has been beating.

 

Kenny Norton woulda stood up to Klitschko's fire!

This is a conference where we alls have a 'go'

I personally feel sorry for posters who indulge in myths,.. you know quite clearly it's the 'safe place' to come when faced with adversity,.. a bit like right-wing politics,.. you could never ever prove it,.. but what you can do is shout it down. :crafty:

 

::

 

Are you a "Wlad is Top 40 material" guy like Cdogg?