Wladimir Klitschko v Larry Holmes in all-time HW rankings

[Lackeos]

Holmes even at 48 would have never lost to Ross Purrity . . .

If you can't separate a fighter's prime from his pre-prime, then you shouldn't be expressing your opinion.

[Ian1973]

Holmes even at 48 would have never lost to Ross Purrity . . .

If you can't separate a fighter's prime from his pre-prime, then you shouldn't be expressing your opinion.

Especially when it's as obvious as Wladimir Klitschko's. Everyone knows after his last loss, Wlad changed everything, banned his brother from his training sessions, sat down analysed everything and became a different (and ultimately better) fighter.

Since he made those changes Wladimir Klitschko has never been beaten. For anyone to even suggest Wlad is the same fighter now as the one who fought Purity is pure ignorance. It's no different from suggesting that Larry Holmes was the same fighter when he beat Muhammed Ali as he was when he beat Rodell Dupree on points on his debut.

[Boxing Writer]

What would you say was a trademark win for Holmes that best demonstrates his skills.

Being 42 y.o. Larry easily beat prime undefeated Ray Mercer. The same Mercer who gave prime Lennox Lewis one of his toughest fights and arguably beat him. Add here that Mercer was 4+ years younger, much more active and in much better shape when he fought Holmes (comparing to his fight against Lewis') and it makes Larry's win over Ray Mercer even more impressive. This win probably demonstrates his skills the best, because he already lost some of his other attributes (like speed) long before this fight.

[evrenb]

I personally think Wladimir would have belonged in any era. I do not think he is as skillful as Larry and I do think he gets away with a lot in the fights..clinching, leaning etc . But you have to major in his all - round athletic ability, size and weight..and power.

I do think that Larry fought in a tougher era..his fight with Cooney would perhaps be a small insight into their match if they had fought. Cooney being around 6ft 6 and 230 lbs. He was as hard a hitter as Wlad though didnt fight in the same style.

Larry may well have been one of the very few who could have coped with Wlad but I see a late stoppage here for Larry.

I feel Tim Witherspoon who fought Larry would have beaten Wlad also ; tough, quick, smart, big, skilled..he had it all. That answers that question.

No I do not envisage Wlad losing to Michael Spinks but as someone said I do not see Larry losing to Any of Wlads opponents either.

[The Great John L]

I personally think Wladimir would have belonged in any era. I do not think he is as skillful as Larry and I do think he gets away with a lot in the fights..clinching, leaning etc . But you have to major in his all - round athletic ability, size and weight..and power.

I do think that Larry fought in a tougher era..his fight with Cooney would perhaps be a small insight into their match if they had fought. Cooney being around 6ft 6 and 230 lbs. He was as hard a hitter as Wlad though didnt fight in the same style.

Larry may well have been one of the very few who could have coped with Wlad but I see a late stoppage here for Larry.

I feel Tim Witherspoon who fought Larry would have beaten Wlad also ; tough, quick, smart, big, skilled..he had it all. That answers that question.

No I do not envisage Wlad losing to Michael Spinks but as someone said I do not see Larry losing to Any of Wlads opponents either.

Hard to argue with any of this.

[evrenb]

I personally think Wladimir would have belonged in any era. I do not think he is as skillful as Larry and I do think he gets away with a lot in the fights..clinching, leaning etc . But you have to major in his all - round athletic ability, size and weight..and power.

I do think that Larry fought in a tougher era..his fight with Cooney would perhaps be a small insight into their match if they had fought. Cooney being around 6ft 6 and 230 lbs. He was as hard a hitter as Wlad though didnt fight in the same style.

Larry may well have been one of the very few who could have coped with Wlad but I see a late stoppage here for Larry.

I feel Tim Witherspoon who fought Larry would have beaten Wlad also ; tough, quick, smart, big, skilled..he had it all. That answers that question.

No I do not envisage Wlad losing to Michael Spinks but as someone said I do not see Larry losing to Any of Wlads opponents either.

Hard to argue with any of this.

I will say this though ; I'd rather get in the ring with Holmes than Wlad

[The Great John L]

I will say this though ; I'd rather get in the ring with Holmes than Wlad

I've gotta agree with that as well. Of course Larry was the master of the thumb, so while Wlad might concuss you Larry could blind you.

[Bard of Boxrec]

It’s hard to deny that Holmes’ calibre of opposition is better than Wladimir’s, but the question is this… could any of Larry’s opponents stood any chance whatsoever of defeating “Dr Steelhammer”?

Would a 6’ 3” 215lb version of Larry Holmes have defeated a 6’ 6” 245lb highly-athletic Wladimir Klitschko, when the Ukrainian is stronger and also has a much higher work-rate than the ‘The Easton Assassin’?

On a pound-for-pound basis, Holmes is greater than Klistchko, but had they fought today based on their actual physical attributes, Wladimir’s sheer size, strength, athletic prowess and very high-work-rate may have been insurmountable advantages.

Put it this way, would a 35 year old 6’6” 245lb chiselled, highly-athletic and fundamentally-sound Wladimir Klitschko have tasted defeat to a 199¾lb fleshy Michael Spinks (who previously fought as a 175lb-er three months prior)? Larry Holmes was only 35 years old when he lost twice to the ‘Jinx’.

I honestly believe that fight fans suffer from excessive nostalgia, as their opinions are unduly biased due to looking at the scenario through rose-tinted glasses!

Higher workrate? What are you smoking? Larry in his prime kept a pace Wlad would not be able to keep up with . . .

Holmes even at 48 would have never lost to Ross Purrity . . .

I feel ya man, these sorts of threads make me depressed. I try not to post in them much. One of these days I'm going to stop expecting a thread in which someone is actually asking if Wlad fricken Klitschko ranks above Larry Holmes, to have Larry Holmes ahead by an amount that reflects genuine knowledge from boxing fans. But no. Then there's the fact that it shouldn't even be a discussion, but apparently it should. Ho hum.

[jezzamundo]

Holmes is better in every other way and he DEFINITELY had better stamina and a higher workrate.

Nope!

The link's you've provided prove nothing meaningful. Just that a post-prime Holmes landed less jabs than a prime Wlad, which isn't exactly surprising. One of the links also shows that Wlad throws just under the heavyweight average of punches per round. Unless you can provide a figure for Holmes's punch stats for all or most of his fights from 1978-84, we don't have much to talk about here. I would be utterly shocked if during those years Holmes had a lower punch output than Wlad during any stage of his career. Actually I'd expect that Wlad's punch output was probably at its highest before he was in his prime and learned to conserve his energy better. Before he got fat and old Holmes certainly had better stamina than Wlad has at any stage of his career - I don't think that's even debatable.

Remember, a chiseled physique is not synonymous with good stamina - a pudgy Tim Witherspoon was certainly better conditioned than the ripped Frank Bruno he stopped.

[evrenb]

Holmes is better in every other way and he DEFINITELY had better stamina and a higher workrate.

Nope!

The link's you've provided prove nothing meaningful. Just that a post-prime Holmes landed less jabs than a prime Wlad, which isn't exactly surprising. One of the links also shows that Wlad throws just under the heavyweight average of punches per round. Unless you can provide a figure for Holmes's punch stats for all or most of his fights from 1978-84, we don't have much to talk about here. I would be utterly shocked if during those years Holmes had a lower punch output than Wlad during any stage of his career. Actually I'd expect that Wlad's punch output was probably at its highest before he was in his prime and learned to conserve his energy better. Before he got fat and old Holmes certainly had better stamina than Wlad has at any stage of his career - I don't think that's even debatable.

Remember, a chiseled physique is not synonymous with good stamina - a pudgy Tim Witherspoon was certainly better conditioned than the ripped Frank Bruno he stopped.

I feel a fighter can never truly re judged/ranked until his career is over. When Tyson was undefeated and at his peak people said he was the greatest thing ever. It wasn't until he lost a few times that people started looking at his ranking more cautiously. Now we look back we cannot say he was the greatest ever as we take his defeats and bad performances into consideration. If Wlad continues another three years beating the best available and doesn't lose then history must rank him very highly.
I suspect he will lose though. Someone who can tough it out past a few rounds and puts pressure on him. I think he was blowing when Pulev got caught.
From the standpoint of all - round ability he will fall on stamina and chin and to a lesser degree heart.

Holmes ranks above as we stand now.

[zorndeslammes]

I'm higher on Wlad than most, but he isn't above Holmes. No way. The level of opposition he's fought is appalling, again, through no fault of his own. I'm 50/50 on him being above Marciano also - while he's so much bigger and his opposition is too, we've seen naturally smaller men have lots of success in this supposed era of giants - Toney, RJJ, Byrd, Chambers, Haye, Adamek, and so on. I'm left wondering if there's any reason not to believe Ezzard Charles would easily break the top 5.

[jamesmcdonnell]

What irks me, is that people always say 'Wlad is way bigger than Holmes - different eras, no way could holmes have competed.'

Well guess what, there's always been men that size around - admittedly in the past they weren't that great, (Carnera, Willard spring to mind) Max Baer was pretty damned good though, if a little wild to say the least.

The thing is, size is a tradeoff, over 6' foot 4" and about 220-230 lbs, these big guys get a lot slower, and more importantly, they simply cannot fight at the kind of pace that Ali, Holmes Holyfield, Bowe, etc did.

The more muscle mass and the bigger the frame, the harder the heart has to work, and the oxygen debt builds up, that's why a young sleek Ali was quicker and more dynamic - and as he got older and heavier, though he still had quick hands, he couldn't move like he used to.

Put someone like Holmes in front of Wlad, who is a constantly moving target, pumping out the jab, giving angles and forcing him to work, and Wlad would definitely tire - he wouldn't be quick enough to pop holmes with that Jab repeatedly, without taking some risks, and he would definitely get hit. Larry hit plenty hard to put Wlad on his ass, and keep him there.

Wlad is pretty quick - especially for a man of his size, but nowhere near as quick as Holmes In his formidable prime - and he doesn't have the fluidity Holmes had. Even if Wlad landed one of his left hooks, I think he'd have a very hard time stopping Holmes - only Tyson managed it, and Tyson was a freak of nature in terms of the combination of speed and power.

[jamesmcdonnell]

What irks me, is that people always say 'Wlad is way bigger than Holmes - different eras, no way could holmes have competed.'

Well guess what, there's always been men that size around - admittedly in the past they weren't that great, (Carnera, Willard spring to mind) Max Baer was pretty damned good though, if a little wild to say the least.

The thing is, size is a tradeoff, over 6' foot 4" and about 220-230 lbs, these big guys get a lot slower, and more importantly, they simply cannot fight at the kind of pace that Ali, Holmes Holyfield, Bowe, etc did.

The more muscle mass and the bigger the frame, the harder the heart has to work, and the oxygen debt builds up, that's why a young sleek Ali was quicker and more dynamic - and as he got older and heavier, though he still had quick hands, he couldn't move like he used to.

Put someone like Holmes in front of Wlad, who is a constantly moving target, pumping out the jab, giving angles and forcing him to work, and Wlad would definitely tire - he wouldn't be quick enough to pop holmes with that Jab repeatedly, without taking some risks, and he would definitely get hit. Larry hit plenty hard to put Wlad on his ass, and keep him there.

Wlad is pretty quick - especially for a man of his size, but nowhere near as quick as Holmes In his formidable prime - and he doesn't have the fluidity Holmes had. Even if Wlad landed one of his left hooks, I think he'd have a very hard time stopping Holmes - only Tyson managed it, and Tyson was a freak of nature in terms of the combination of speed and power.

There's a reason why weight divisions exist... and only naive or intellectually challenged individuals would refuse to recognise the justification for multiple weight classes.

After all, a three inch height, thirty pound weight, as well as significant physical athletic prowess advantages that Wladimir holds over Larry are insurmountable in nature!

Did you not read my post - ? It's a trade off, men the size of Wlad are not that nimble, - watch Wlad when he's in retreat, he looks horrifically disorganised - he is fortunate that there' nobody out there good enough to take advantage of it.

Wlad is not a better athlete than Holmes though, Holmes used to fight at a furious pace for 15 rounds, Wlad has to pace himself to stop the arse falling out of it.

Just because Wlad is bigger and more muscular, does not make him a better athlete - it's like saying Usain Bolt is a better Athlete than Mo Farah, because he's bigger. Holmes had WAY better stamina than Wlad has ever had, even in his 40's.

[fanman]

u only have to watch vlad to see that he would be an absolute nightmare to face. a cautious boxer with huge power, ala lennox lewis.
that said huge men can be a little clumsy and holmes was genuinely fast, like ali.
they'll never meet, holmes' legacy is a little stronger, who would of won is anyones guess.

[jamesmcdonnell]

u only have to watch vlad to see that he would be an absolute nightmare to face. a cautious boxer with huge power, ala lennox lewis.
that said huge men can be a little clumsy and holmes was genuinely fast, like ali.
they'll never meet, holmes' legacy is a little stronger, who would of won is anyones guess.

Of course it is all supposition, and yes, Wlad is going to be very difficult.

Interesting Quote I read from Hugh McIlvanney, a very good journalist, the other day, he said that he was allowed to interview ali in the dressing room immediately after the fight, and when he interviewed Ali after he faced Foreman - Ali said that initially when he faced Foreman, he tried to dance around him, but realised Foreman was just too big for that to work - I presume he meant that he realised Foreman would be able to cut the ring off due to his stature and tactics. The rope a dope was a tactic borne of necessity, as he didn't figure he could hope to win by trying to pick and poke and move around for 15 rounds.

It shows the difference size makes, Foreman was the biggest man Ali ever faced (I think that's right without checking) -

One caveat is that Foreman was a guy who cut the ring off, whereas Wlad is more of a counterpuncher, he waits for opponents' mistakes and then whallops them. Only Norton as I recall ever had much success counterpunching Ali, and he was a very wily operator with a great inside game.

[dempseyfire]

u only have to watch vlad to see that he would be an absolute nightmare to face. a cautious boxer with huge power, ala lennox lewis.
that said huge men can be a little clumsy and holmes was genuinely fast, like ali.
they'll never meet, holmes' legacy is a little stronger, who would of won is anyones guess.

Of course it is all supposition, and yes, Wlad is going to be very difficult.

Interesting Quote I read from Hugh McIlvanney, a very good journalist, the other day, he said that he was allowed to interview ali in the dressing room immediately after the fight, and when he interviewed Ali after he faced Foreman - Ali said that initially when he faced Foreman, he tried to dance around him, but realised Foreman was just too big for that to work - I presume he meant that he realised Foreman would be able to cut the ring off due to his stature and tactics. The rope a dope was a tactic borne of necessity, as he didn't figure he could hope to win by trying to pick and poke and move around for 15 rounds.

It shows the difference size makes, Foreman was the biggest man Ali ever faced (I think that's right without checking) -

One caveat is that Foreman was a guy who cut the ring off, whereas Wlad is more of a counterpuncher, he waits for opponents' mistakes and then whallops them. Only Norton as I recall ever had much success counterpunching Ali, and he was a very wily operator with a great inside game.

Wlad doesn't even really counter-punch; he'll wait until after his opponent has stopped throwing (and often those are lunging punches as his opponents attempt to reach his chin); he usually doesn't counter the actual shots; one aspect of his cautious nature.

Ali had fought guys as big or bigger than Foreman; Charlie Powell was as big as George,and Al "Blue" Lewis was even bigger. Foreman was just a better fighter than those guys, as well as sort of a physical freak in terms of his sheer strength combined with athleticism.

[lefty]

Had this discussion with my father earlier today, as we were discussing last night's match... Dad said, "I don't think Klitschko could of beat Larry Holmes," to which I said, "The problem with Vladimir is he is so large, that he doesn't look as athletic or as fluid or as skilled even as much smaller fighters who came before, like Holmes." He doesn't look all that great or impressive on film, because he isn't as lithe or nimble as men smaller than himself. However, that doesn't mean he isn't every bit as good or great as others before him--- and really, when one thinks about it, how many heavyweights can you name being capable of facing a man with all the qualities of Klitschko? Because of his size, strength, talent, ability, and style--- he would make EVERY champion that ever came before him look bad.

And that is the key operative word here, is "look bad"... I'm not saying "win"... but in all honesty, I can see 6'7" 245 pound Klitschko, whose been unbeaten in a decade, with 17 consecutive title defenses even making Muhammad Ali look dull or boring in the ring with him. And Ali would have trouble with him. No one can deny that. Anyone who does, either doesnt know anything about boxing--- or they are just fans of Ali the person, and Ali the legend, and Ali the symbol rather than Ali the fighter.

As of this time... however... Klitschko is three title defenses away from tying Holmes' 20... and eight away from tying the world record set by Joe Louis of 25... In all reality, if you have 3 voluntary defenses and 5 mandatories, or vice versa, I can see it being done... its not that the division today is so poor, as it is that we have a division with a champion whose skillset and abilities are so far and away from the rest of the field. Because, believe you me, if Klitschko was gone--- we would have one slugfest after another, and it would be called a rather entertaining time in the heavyweight division, even if there wouldnt be a clear cut champion in the mix.

I actually think he is pretty damn athletic for a guy of his size.

[zorndeslammes]

The problem with the argument that Holmes fought smaller men incapable of handling big heavyweights is that smaller men have moved up and proved plenty capable of beating the big guys around right now. There's a couple tall guys in the top 20, but the size over everything argument seems to have largely gone out the window. The top 25 only has a couple "super sized" guys now because most of them are stiffs. C'mon, like Sergei Kovalev wouldn't be able to handle Andy Ruiz Jr.

[dempseyfire]

"What puzzles me is one simple fact… the only fighters that Larry Holmes faced when he was in prime that was fairly similar in stature to Wladimir Klitschko (weighing roughly 240+lbs), was Leroy Jones & Roy Williams"

What? Ever heard of Gerry Cooney? Bonecrusher Smith?

The likes of Witherspoon, Berbick, Shavers, Snipes, Norton etc. were BIGGER than Chagaev, Povetkin, Haye, Ibragimov, Peter etc. but in much better shape and better athletes (with Haye being an exception).

[zorndeslammes]

We're talking about a dead-cert Hall-of-Famer, (Wladimir Klitschko), who's fighting style fully exploits his size (i.e. the jab, grab, push tactic) fighting a man that probably would have been campaigning as a cruiserweight in the modern era (i.e. his prime fighting weight was 215lbs).

I know. And his best challengers are not-nearly-as-good men Holmes' size or smaller. The division is crap. Maybe he could beat Holmes in a theoretical matchup, but in "all time HW rankings" like the thread title says, Holmes clearly has the better record.

[Othro]

Wlad is great no doubt but I have Holmes at #3 . Not sure what Wlad could do to take that spot.

[chucktaylor]

We're talking about a dead-cert Hall-of-Famer, (Wladimir Klitschko), who's fighting style fully exploits his size (i.e. the jab, grab, push tactic) fighting a man that probably would have been campaigning as a cruiserweight in the modern era (i.e. his prime fighting weight was 215lbs).

I know. And his best challengers are not-nearly-as-good men Holmes' size or smaller. The division is crap. Maybe he could beat Holmes in a theoretical matchup, but in "all time HW rankings" like the thread title says, Holmes clearly has the better record.

On a pound-for-pound basis, accomplishment and historical contribution to the sport of boxing, Larry Holmes is "greater" than Wladimir. However, I suspect that this commonly-held perception will inevitably change a decade after Wladimir's retirement, because fight fans would then evaluate Klitschko's career whilst wearing nosalgic rose-tinted glasses!

That being said, the reality of the matter is that Wladimir Klitschko would have been considered as a huge favourite to defeat Larry Holmes had they ever actually shared the ring in the present day (i.e. a cruserweight versus a heavyweight).

So you are one of the 15 (at this point) who voted for Holmes in the poll?

[dempseyfire]

"What puzzles me is one simple fact… the only fighters that Larry Holmes faced when he was in prime that was fairly similar in stature to Wladimir Klitschko (weighing roughly 240+lbs), was Leroy Jones & Roy Williams"

What? Ever heard of Gerry Cooney? Bonecrusher Smith?

Pay attention to what I've actually written.. I already mentioned James 'Bonecrusher' Smith... and a prime version of Gerry Cooney was typically more than 20lbs lighter than Wladimir Klitschko.

Cooney weighed 225-230 in his mid-late 20s. Wlad weighed 235-240 that same age. Stop exaggerating his size.

Holmes was far bigger than Haye and Ibragimov who scared Wlad so much he had to win a staring contest with each over 12 rounds, or Povetkin who Wlad grabbed every 10 seconds. You have no idea what you're talking about.

[gregor]

The thing is, size is a tradeoff, over 6' foot 4" and about 220-230 lbs, these big guys get a lot slower, and more importantly, they simply cannot fight at the kind of pace that Ali, Holmes Holyfield, Bowe, etc did.

Bowe was over 6'4'' himself

I agree the size can be a trade off, still if a fighter knows how to use it is quite serious advantage. There are boxers who are never able to use this advantage like Michael Grant... but also ones like Vitali who built most of career on it.

[ArmaanCFC]

People seem to underrate current fighters when comparing them to past fighters, I'll never seem to know why.