N YOUR Estimation, is Wladimir Klitschko 1 of the Top 10 Fighters N the World, Regardless of Weight Class???... If NOT, what Can Wlad Do to Earn YOUR Lb 4 Lb Respect???...Is he Top 15???...Top 20???... REED:dunno:
He stands above his division more than anybody now (that Calzaghe has changed his division) alongside with maybe Pavlik. So yes, obviously, he is a "p4per"
Show a more impressive resume'/consistent performances than everyone else who's ahead of him on the p4p list. When you win fights because your division sucks and because you're so much bigger and longer than everyone, it's kind of hard to quite your doubters. So to be honest I don't ever see him making it on the list unless every other division heads south like the HW one has. Only way Wlad can earn his way on there right now is to start at least KOing most of the bum opposition he's facing. He needs to start going Mosley on those guys.
Honestly, I don't know. :dunno: He SHOULD be, because I agree with Ugo that he is MILES ahead of the rest in his division, but I really can't decide if that is because Wlad is good or because the HW division really IS as bad as the naysayers say it is. Also, his appalling chinniness is a factor which holds me back from lauding him, not to mention shit like last night, which was one of the most boring fights I have ever watched. To think that I stayed up until after 4am to watch that...:doh: If I HAD to make a pick on this point, I suppose I'd go with that I don't think that Wlad is top ten P4P, to be honest. I think he's more like 10-15. But I could be wrong. I could just be still pissed after that garbage last night...
It depends on how you rank p4p. If it's "in a p4p sense", I never include heavyweights in p4p lists simply because of the weight range. The heavyweight division is really a multitude of divisions, if the lb. increments kept increasing, so it's much different than any other division. Klitschko could go from a huge size advantage (against Ibragimov) to a huge size disadvantage (against Valuev) in the same division, so I think size plays too much of a factor in the styles of heavyweight fights for me to compare, in a p4p sense. Just comparing resumes, I think you could argue Klitschko's accomplished more than some p4p top 10-15 fighters...like a fighter like Pavlik.
Things like reach and power are pretty essential for the best FIGHTER in the world. Thus I can't see how you hold them against Wlad. If you are discussing the most technical boxers, then I understand, but that is completely different
Sorry but it's the shittyness of the division and nothing more. You can't tell me if some new HW shows up with a little skill and a lot of toughness that people wouldn't give him a shot against Wlad. He could be totally raw but if he matches Wlad in size and has good power, I doubt most people would wager their money on Wlad.
WTF? Sure, if there was a welterweight with Floyd's speed and more power then many would pick him over Floyd too. Terrible logic bro
Not really. A brand new guy with no experience and his only advantage is speed and power? I wouldn't take him over Floyd and I doubt most others would either. What would Wlad do if Corey Sanders came out of retirement again? I'll tell you what he'd do, he'd avoid him like the plague.
Wlad rules a horrible era of Heavyweights. If Wlad was impressive by destroying his competition than one can argue because he would be dominant. Fights like last night only drop his stock.
Exactly. This is why P4P is dead and buried. The internet ruined it, with every second asshole having an opinion, it warped and altered what the term actually meant...so now it means "a way to prop my favourites. And no, I don't have to know a thing about the sport, or have actually seen all the best fighters in action. I can say what I want, cos its the interweb and I have a right to my opinion. So fuck you. Warcraft rules. WTF. What other sense could it be? Ugh.
Because it seems like some people make a p4p list by comparing resumes to resumes and taking the 10-12 "best" and then ordering them based on "accomplishment". Others do it more on speculation, of "who would beat who in a p4p sense".
dsimon writes: Cosign on Tam's point. I hate all these lists. Occasionally some people with a lot of knowledge make a real list and it is wonderous to behold. Rubio has come up with some great lists int he past and a good deal of posters here have also had some good ones. But it takes a lot of insight to make these distinctions properly... you are dealing, at all times with a calculus of variables when you create such a list. Frankly I never even try to make these distinctions. My knowledge of the sport has its limits and I would never pretend to make a legitimate pound for pound list. Even more ridiculous are distinctions like fighter of the year. It gets into a pissing contest where one has to somehow qualify and quantify the success of a group of fighters... like a beauty pagaent. I mean tell you what put mrs Venezuala and mrs Argentina in front of me and they are both beautiful ok? There are some elite fighters and it is debatable whether Wlad deserves to be in that category. My reason for this is straightfoward: We have to look at Sam Peter. It appears now that Sam Peter is not very good. At the time Wlad beat him Peter, at that time unproven, gave some reasons to believe that he, Peter, was an elite heavy. Since that time he has shown that he is not an elite heavy. Therefore it remains to be seen whether Wlad could beat an elite heavy. Not Wlad's fault but a real issue when determining whether one is elite or not.
where does that fat, sloppy russian rank? the same fat, sloppy russian with zero punching power. who couldn't beat the rainman, where does he rank? where does the rainman rank? how about that other tap dancer? not to mention klitschko had a considerable size advantage on all of these stalwarts.
There are PLENTY of heavyweight participants out there who are taller than 6"4,....height, reach, and size alone doesn't get you anywhere unless you've ''got something else'', take a captain cooke at the size of the beltholders around him, particularly Chagaev, ....how did he overcome giants like Virchis...or especially Valuev?..:nono: I have to respectfully disagree with what is,...I am sorry to say, a very flimsey case you've been trying to make against Wlad, and for YEARS you've been at it :nono: . "If Mike Tyson was the same size as Lennox Lewis he woulda kildim".
I voted no but only because p4p is not supposed to include HWs. This was because it's a given (or used to be) that the HW champ was considered the best in the sport. P4P is about ranking the best of the other divisions.
dsimon writes: That makes a lot of sense. I think the heavyweight is the guy who can transcend boxing. I mean SRR was incredible so was Jones, you have Mayweather as well, but Ali stood for an era, ditto for Dempsey, Sullivan had a similar appeal. As a matter of fact people expect that of our heavy weight champs.... Holmes was critisized because he did not transcend and Tyson transcended only to show us Enkido... The Mesopotamian hero who was the jungle man, the uncivilized one before meeting Gilgimesh in battle. We loved the savagery of Mike but when we asked him to put it in a bottle and use it appropriately and he couldn't then he became a symbol of all that was excessive in our society.
4 the Sake of ARGUEMENT, Name 10-15 Guys who R CLEARLY More Deserving of "Lb 4 Lb" Designation than Wlad???... REED:dunno:
floyd pacman hopkins pavlik calzaghe JMM I vasquez R Marquez d haye junior witter kessler s molitor chris john E valero J guzman diaz