The term "in his prime"

[Duch]

Don't you ever wonder is it appropriate to compare different boxers "in their primes" instead of something else? I mean, isn't better to look at the whole career of a boxer and judge him as a sportsman from the beginning to his end? I know, it's even more abstractive to compare people like that because we all know that e.g. Ali from 60's is a "different person" than Ali from 70's and if we try to tell who could win a fight between Ali and somebody else we must compare them in a specific period of time - or in the concrete date, or by the magic term "in his prime". But when you make e.g. your top10, you still compare all these guys "in their primes" or you look at everything what they did, no matter in what age, no matter how worse they were later than earlier but still they were on the divine level and could be called "real champions"? I mean, the idea of "in his prime" is very enigmatic and you don't need to take big effort to find on this forum a discussion like that: "Well, but he wasn't in his prime anymore", "No, he was", "He wasn't"... And one boxer could be more time in his prime than others. Everybody knows that it's harder to compare e.g. Riddick Bowe "in his prime" because that wasn't very long time.

That's even a more general discussion because I'm talking also about your criteria of making your top10.
And the clarity of the term "in his prime".
And if the real champion shouldn't be in a fantastic shape as good as it possible, not only for a while?

I mean, look at e.g. at Tyson. He has a lot of fans. He was fantastic. He was a world champion as a 20-year old. That's superb. But he lost with Douglas when he was just 24 and later he wasn't the same guy as he was earlier and often people justify his losses in 90's because he "wasn't in his prime". And some people say that he could destroy e.g. Holyfield if he was in his prime. So, what? The fact is that he didn't do anything with him. And Holyfield was even 4 years older than Tyson. Evander is a great example for me how to be in a good shape for years. I'm not trying to say that it's not true that the older somebody is, the worse he becomes because he looses his speed, condition etc. That's true but 30 year old guy is not an old man. A lot of boxers became great in his 30's, especially in a heavyweight division. And on the other hand, look at Foreman. He had 10 years of a hiatus and became the world champion when he was 46. Man, that's very, very impressive for me. That's the guy I could name a real champion. I know that Foreman's case is an extreme. That's only an example.

So, yeah... A lot of writing... I will clarify again - I'm trying to know your opinion about the things which I underlined.

[drunkenpiper36]

I like to rate fighters by everything they did from beginning to end, and sometimes even include what they did in the amateurs. The fact that Lennox Lewis competed in two olympics and brought back a gold from one of them should never be over looked. Early prospect results, prime achievements and even late career outcomes are all things that weigh into the equation for me. While I can certainly ( and always do ) make concessions for things like defeats while being underdeveloped, past prime, or returning from layoffs, I still factor them in and average things out in the end. I guess its all about balance weighing the good with the bad. As for head to head fantasy match ups, I generally only compare men when they were at what I feel to be their best. Of course that is subjective and not always agreed upon by everybody.

[scorpio83]

For me, I couldn't rate Lennox Lewis over Mike Tyson on the all-time heavyweight rankings because Tyson made more impact than Lewis ever done was knocking out every heavyweight contenders, future or ex-champion during his era in the ring. Yes, Mike Tyson knocked out the Larry Holmes in 1988 wasn't the prime Holmes who defended his heavyweight title 19 or 20 times depending whether the fight with Marvis Frazier was a title fight or not. The boxing fans thought Lewis beat Holyfield and Tyson rated him higher than them, but there was one problem. Although Lennox Lewis who beat Evander Holyfield and Mike Tyson in his time was his great accomplishment because they were both big names, but Lewis beat the past prime Holyfield and Tyson and they want to rate him above them? It doesn't make sense to me. I will acknowledge Lennox Lewis for almost cleaning out every heavyweights in his time and avenged his two losses, which Tyson have never done and I understand that. However, Tyson's punching power that knocked out nearly every fighter in his prime made boxing fans felt impressed and excited for how Tyson used his power to win fights.

[drunkenpiper36]

For me, I couldn't rate Lennox Lewis over Mike Tyson on the all-time heavyweight rankings because Tyson made more impact than Lewis ever done was knocking out every heavyweight contenders, future or ex-champion during his era in the ring. Yes, Mike Tyson knocked out the Larry Holmes in 1988 wasn't the prime Holmes who defended his heavyweight title 19 or 20 times depending whether the fight with Marvis Frazier was a title fight or not. The boxing fans thought Lewis beat Holyfield and Tyson rated him higher than them, but there was one problem. Although Lennox Lewis who beat Evander Holyfield and Mike Tyson in his time was his great accomplishment because they were both big names, but Lewis beat the past prime Holyfield and Tyson and they want to rate him above them? It doesn't make sense to me. I will acknowledge Lennox Lewis for almost cleaning out every heavyweights in his time and avenged his two losses, which Tyson have never done and I understand that. However, Tyson's punching power that knocked out nearly every fighter in his prime made boxing fans felt impressed and excited for how Tyson used his power to win fights.

You just credited Tyson for beating past prime ex-champions while discrediting Lewis for doing the same, all in one breath.. That isn't analysis... Its cheer leading.

[gilgamesh]

For me, I couldn't rate Lennox Lewis over Mike Tyson on the all-time heavyweight rankings because Tyson made more impact than Lewis ever done was knocking out every heavyweight contenders, future or ex-champion during his era in the ring. Yes, Mike Tyson knocked out the Larry Holmes in 1988 wasn't the prime Holmes who defended his heavyweight title 19 or 20 times depending whether the fight with Marvis Frazier was a title fight or not. The boxing fans thought Lewis beat Holyfield and Tyson rated him higher than them, but there was one problem. Although Lennox Lewis who beat Evander Holyfield and Mike Tyson in his time was his great accomplishment because they were both big names, but Lewis beat the past prime Holyfield and Tyson and they want to rate him above them? It doesn't make sense to me. I will acknowledge Lennox Lewis for almost cleaning out every heavyweights in his time and avenged his two losses, which Tyson have never done and I understand that. However, Tyson's punching power that knocked out nearly every fighter in his prime made boxing fans felt impressed and excited for how Tyson used his power to win fights.

You just credited Tyson for beating past prime ex-champions while discrediting Lewis for doing the same, all in one breath.. That isn't analysis... Its cheer leading.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I can't see any scenario where Tyson rates over Lewis. And while I wasn't a fan, the people that portray Lennox as some kind of Klitschko dull fighter are exaggerating big time. One thing about Lewis, if you were someone he should stop he got you the fornicate out of there swiftly and brutally.

[The Great John L]

I can't see any scenario where Tyson rates over Lewis. And while I wasn't a fan, the people that portray Lennox as some kind of Klitschko dull fighter are exaggerating big time. One thing about Lewis, if you were someone he should stop he got you the eff out of there swiftly and brutally.

x2

[Duch]

I can't see any scenario where Tyson rates over Lewis. And while I wasn't a fan, the people that portray Lennox as some kind of Klitschko dull fighter are exaggerating big time. One thing about Lewis, if you were someone he should stop he got you the eff out of there swiftly and brutally.

Rather Klitschko is some kind of dull Lewis.

[The Great John L]

Rather Klitschko is some kind of dull Lewis.

Those two don't belong in the same sentence.

[HomicideHenry]

Rather Klitschko is some kind of dull Lewis.

Those two don't belong in the same sentence.

I think there is an argument to be made that Klitschko is modeled in respects to Lewis; after all, Emmanuel Stewart began training Klitschko and from that point on Klitschko was more skillful, and overall dominate tactician, like Lewis was. What Stewart taught Lewis, he taught Klitschko as well.

[BoxBuzz]

Tyson was very well advertized, managed, mediated, promoted, manipulated, exploited and handled....for a while. And when he wasn't......well he started having bad days.

And he was pretty damn good. I don't mean to say he was not a force, he was. And as exciting as Joe Frazier, Rocky Marciano, and Jack Dempsey before him.

But he was no Lennox Lewis, He was scarcely a Riddick Bowe. And I happen to think Bowe peaked better than Lewis, but both Bowe and Tyson's career could not outdo Lennox's.

But Cmon, who feasted on more dead meat than Tyson? And yes....he faced some greats as well, but you can NEVER make a case for a "Magnificent Tyson Comeback". Can you? And he bogged down pretty fundamentally when faced with good fighters at their best.

And this is a big deal to be considered, in order to be considered truly great.


The best HW comeback? Ali's body of work in the wake of Joe Frazier knocking his ass on the ground.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Wlad is certainly modeled after Lewis, he's just inferior in every way.

[HomicideHenry]

Wlad is certainly modeled after Lewis, he's just inferior in every way.

I don't know if that can be really made into a case, considering Klitschko at present time is as dominate as any other heavyweight champion in history. Maybe eight years ago, or even five years ago that could be argued. Now, Klitschko has come into his own, and is a universe apart in skill and talent over anyone else in the field. Just like Lewis was. The only difference between the two, is Lewis would slug it out from time to time--- Klitschko opts out of that option.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Wlad is certainly modeled after Lewis, he's just inferior in every way.

I don't know if that can be really made into a case, considering Klitschko at present time is as dominate as any other heavyweight champion in history. Maybe eight years ago, or even five years ago that could be argued. Now, Klitschko has come into his own, and is a universe apart in skill and talent over anyone else in the field. Just like Lewis was. The only difference between the two, is Lewis would slug it out from time to time--- Klitschko opts out of that option.

Omar narvaez is dominant too. Opposition is what matters to me and if you listed the top 10 wins of Wlad and Lewis, Wlad would have 1. That's a huge difference, Lennox was more skilled and had more balls. They're not in the same ballpark.

Wlad opts out of slugging because he is fragile and fights opponents so weak that it isn't even a worry. Lennox didn't want to slug with Mercer, he had too.

Being head and shoulders above crap isn't that big of a deal. Wlad would be even money with Morrison in my book.

[gilgamesh]

Wlad is certainly modeled after Lewis, he's just inferior in every way.

He arguably has a better jab than Lewis (because he uses it more), but that's about it. The rest of Lennox's arsenal was superior. That being said Wlad has a full arsenal if he'd just use it.

He has a good quick left hook and a nice uppercut on the rare occasions he uses them. He almost never uses anything but the jab and right hand though.

[BoxBuzz]

Wasn't Wlad always considered the better of the two brothers....up until china chin syndrome was suspected? For a while after he showed vulnerability Vitali was given the respect as the better of the two, and now it has shifted back to Wlad because he has been so much more active I assume.


Who really had the potential as the better fighter between these two?

[HomicideHenry]

Omar narvaez is dominant too. Opposition is what matters to me and if you listed the top 10 wins of Wlad and Lewis, Wlad would have 1. That's a huge difference, Lennox was more skilled and had more balls. They're not in the same ballpark.

Wlad opts out of slugging because he is fragile and fights opponents so weak that it isn't even a worry. Lennox didn't want to slug with Mercer, he had too.

Being head and shoulders above crap isn't that big of a deal. Wlad would be even money with Morrison in my book.

Well, one can see your personal bias, so almost no reason to even argue/debate with you on the two men in comparisons however, I will give it a shot....

-Lewis & Klitschko, essentially avenged their losses by knockout; for Klitschko, he was stopped by Purrity, Sanders, Brewster--- he avenged the Brewster loss by kayo; and Sanders retired, as did Purrity. The closest to 'vengence' otherwise is the first Sam Peter fight, where Klitschko kissed canvas three times, but managed to win a unaminous decision over Peter--- the rematch was virtually one sided with Klitschko boxing his head off before kayoing him.

-Lewis & Klitschko, essentially have the same style; what Lewis called 'Boxology' was merely an excuse for playing it safe and cautious in the ring---- slugging wasnt his strong suit--- neither is it for Klitschko. When the two men put science first, they are both untouchable. When the two men attempted to slug, they were in a big time mess.

-Lewis & Klitschko, both have a big laundry list of names to their credit in victory; somehow people say that Klitschko hasnt fought the same quality opposition, or even enough high profile names, contenders, etc. but let's look at the list: Byrd (2x's), Rahman, Ibragimov, Chagaev, Mercer, Peter (2x's), Brewster (split wins), Botha, Haye--- that is nine champions either who had a belt at the time, or were ex champions--- not too damn shabby considering only one of nine made Klitschko lose, and that was later avenged. Those are just names off the top of my head--- am sure there are more to add as well. And you combine this with the fact that not even Lennox Lewis had a straight reign anywhere near eight years in length, let alone have that many successful title defenses---- the fact is Lewis fought some damn stinkers as well in his life time, don't paint a picture that he fought such vastly superior opposition, because outside of a washed up Mike Tyson, an old Evander Holyfield, and Razor Ruddock he never fought really anyone who was all that great. MERCER may of been the one man who was near his prime, that Lewis ever fought that was worth a damn.

-Klitschko, unlike Lewis, generally has a respect for the organisations he competes under; Lewis, on the other hand, threw away his IBF championship in the hopes that Roy Jones would beat Ruiz, then Byrd would lose to Holyfield, etc. He also threw away his WBA title years before, rather than defend it against his mandatory in John Ruiz---- sure he would of easily beaten Ruiz, but the point is Lewis is one of those guys who didnt always honor his commitments--- sure, alot of men that step up to face Klitschko are unknowns, and dont have a reason to really be in there, but Klitschko honors his commitments with the WBO/IBF/WBA, etc and faces who he is mandated to face, so it cant be held against him--- want to blame shitty matches, blame it on the organisations rather than Klitschko's honor.

As for Tommy Morrison, Jesus rest his soul, I don't think would of been all that much of a challenge to Klitschko. His best shot would of been in the first three or four rounds--- but I cant see him getting passed the reach and jab of Klitschko. Morrison had horrible stamina issues, and would of ultimately gassed out, and been TKO'd by Vladimir.

[BoxBuzz]

Saad....I liked this......

"Being head and shoulders above crap isn't that big of a deal."

But tell that to Ralph Cramden and his buddy Norton.

[HomicideHenry]

Wasn't Wlad always considered the better of the two brothers....up until china chin syndrome was suspected? For a while after he showed vulnerability Vitali was given the respect as the better of the two, and now it has shifted back to Wlad because he has been so much more active I assume.


Who really had the potential as the better fighter between these two?

Even Vitali will say Vladimir is the better boxer/tactician than he is.

I guess when it comes right down to it, you have to ask "Who would win?" if the two fought.

Vitali was strong, tough, and had an awkward style that presented a multitude of problems to every man he ever faced. Vladimir does have fast hands, a superior jab, and overall better arsenal than Vitali--- I just happen to think that no one yet has really brought that out of him, because for the past eight years, no one has really posed a threat to Vladimir.

I think at the end of the day, though, when history looks back on this era they will always argue whether which Klitschko was better--- and both men, as a result, will never get their just due.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Omar narvaez is dominant too. Opposition is what matters to me and if you listed the top 10 wins of Wlad and Lewis, Wlad would have 1. That's a huge difference, Lennox was more skilled and had more balls. They're not in the same ballpark.

Wlad opts out of slugging because he is fragile and fights opponents so weak that it isn't even a worry. Lennox didn't want to slug with Mercer, he had too.

Being head and shoulders above crap isn't that big of a deal. Wlad would be even money with Morrison in my book.

Well, one can see your personal bias, so almost no reason to even argue/debate with you on the two men in comparisons however, I will give it a shot....

You should have stopped writing here, where I stopped reading.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Saad....I liked this......

"Being head and shoulders above crap isn't that big of a deal."

But tell that to Ralph Cramden and his buddy Norton.

I just don't understand why Wlad's followers dismiss dominant fighters like Narvaez and Samson BoyDutchGym. If dominance is all that matters, anyone that feasts on crap is an ATG. It's not Wlad's fault that the division is a cesspool, I'd be more willing to listen if he didn't lose three times to these inferior fighters and he wasn't too terrified to use his immense power to wipe out nonthreatening rivals. Forgive me, I think Ron Lyle would make him wet himself.

[gilgamesh]

Saad....I liked this......

"Being head and shoulders above crap isn't that big of a deal."

But tell that to Ralph Cramden and his buddy Norton.

I just don't understand why Wlad's followers dismiss dominant fighters like Narvaez and Samson BoyDutchGym. If dominance is all that matters, anyone that feasts on crap is an ATG. It's not Wlad's fault that the division is a cesspool, I'd be more willing to listen if he didn't lose three times to these inferior fighters and he wasn't too terrified to use his immense power to wipe out nonthreatening rivals. Forgive me, I think Ron Lyle would make him wet himself.

That's probably the most frustrating thing about Wlad for me. The way he lets every opponent stick around for quite a few rounds even if he could've just smoked 'em in a round or two.

If he just blew a lot of these sh*t contenders outta there the way he should he'd be a lot more appreciated by fans.

I don't dismiss Narvaez or Dutch Boy Gym because I know little to nothing about them. I know Dutch Boy Gym held a title that is not consider major in any way, and made like 30 defenses of it or some sh*t.

For the record I am going to make an effort to start following the sport below 118 pounds more than I have. As knowledgeable as I am on Boxing and as much as I appreciate the sport I owe it to myself to know more about the little guys. I'm sure I'm robbing myself of a lot of great fights by not following those weight classes.

[HomicideHenry]

That's probably the most frustrating thing about Wlad for me. The way he lets every opponent stick around for quite a few rounds even if he could've just smoked 'em in a round or two.

If he just blew a lot of these sh*t contenders outta there the way he should he'd be a lot more appreciated by fans.

If I recall, the greatest boxer of all time Sam Langford, often carried opponents in his career. Doesn't detract one iota from the greatness of Langford. Same thing with Klitschko. Why beat the living crap out of someone, brutalise somebody who may or may not have no business being in the same ring with you, when you can let them fall to pieces on their own?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Saad....I liked this......

"Being head and shoulders above crap isn't that big of a deal."

But tell that to Ralph Cramden and his buddy Norton.

I just don't understand why Wlad's followers dismiss dominant fighters like Narvaez and Samson BoyDutchGym. If dominance is all that matters, anyone that feasts on crap is an ATG. It's not Wlad's fault that the division is a cesspool, I'd be more willing to listen if he didn't lose three times to these inferior fighters and he wasn't too terrified to use his immense power to wipe out nonthreatening rivals. Forgive me, I think Ron Lyle would make him wet himself.

That's probably the most frustrating thing about Wlad for me. The way he lets every opponent stick around for quite a few rounds even if he could've just smoked 'em in a round or two.

If he just blew a lot of these sh*t contenders outta there the way he should he'd be a lot more appreciated by fans.

I don't dismiss Narvaez or Dutch Boy Gym because I know little to nothing about them. I know Dutch Boy Gym held a title that is not consider major in any way, and made like 30 defenses of it or some sh*t.

For the record I am going to make an effort to start following the sport below 118 pounds more than I have. As knowledgeable as I am on Boxing and as much as I appreciate the sport I owe it to myself to know more about the little guys. I'm sure I'm robbing myself of a lot of great fights by not following those weight classes.

I wasn't talking about you Gil, and to be fair Wlad has beaten everyone around him while Omar has not. It's just a point that dominance doesn't mean everything. Wlad is clearly the best Heavyweight of his era, but that's all I can give him.

The worst example was the ghost of Rahman, he may as well have had a sign on his head saying KO ME! It's part of what has made him successful, cutting out all chances for someone to touch his chin. Good for him, at the same time that shit isn't going to cut it against really good or great Heavyweights.

[gilgamesh]

That's probably the most frustrating thing about Wlad for me. The way he lets every opponent stick around for quite a few rounds even if he could've just smoked 'em in a round or two.

If he just blew a lot of these sh*t contenders outta there the way he should he'd be a lot more appreciated by fans.

I don't dismiss Narvaez or Dutch Boy Gym because I know little to nothing about them. I know Dutch Boy Gym held a title that is not consider major in any way, and made like 30 defenses of it or some sh*t.

For the record I am going to make an effort to start following the sport below 118 pounds more than I have. As knowledgeable as I am on Boxing and as much as I appreciate the sport I owe it to myself to know more about the little guys. I'm sure I'm robbing myself of a lot of great fights by not following those weight classes.

I wasn't talking about you Gil, and to be fair Wlad has beaten everyone around him while Omar has not. It's just a point that dominance doesn't mean everything. Wlad is clearly the best Heavyweight of his era, but that's all I can give him.

The worst example was the ghost of Rahman, he may as well have had a sign on his head saying KO ME! It's part of what has made him successful, cutting out all chances for someone to touch his chin. Good for him, at the same time that poo isn't going to cut it against really good or great Heavyweights.

Yeah and although he lost to him the first time Lewis KO'ed and dominated a much better Rahman in 4 than the one that Wlad took out in 7. He was shot to pieces by the time Wlad fought him.

Lewis underestimated Rahman pretty obviously in that first fight, and that's why he lost. I'm not trying to make excuses for him, but I mean I think the 2nd fight between them pretty much proves that. Rahman couldn't do sh*t against him in the rematch. It looked like he was fighting a completely different fighter.