Wladimir Klitschko: Best win?

[DrDuke]

Oh please yourself. Byrd didn't have much power, no question about it. However, he was fast, much faster than anyone else that Klitschko beat. He was much better defesesvily than than anyone Klitschko beat.
Byrd actually has some decent wins. Take a look at his career. His victims list is a lot more impressive than anyone Povetkin, Haye, Peter etc.

Maybe only because of Tua. No one of the mentioned have the same caliber victim. Only Povetkin suddenly has Byrd himself. But what else Byrd had? Shot Holyfield? Robbery decision win over Oquendo? Or maybe robbery draw against Golota? Stop your delusion.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Oh please yourself. Byrd didn't have much power, no question about it. However, he was fast, much faster than anyone else that Klitschko beat. He was much better defesesvily than than anyone Klitschko beat.
Byrd actually has some decent wins. Take a look at his career. His victims list is a lot more impressive than anyone Povetkin, Haye, Peter etc.

Byrd is vastly under rated.

I also think Byrd is very underrated..

[oogiebe]

Oh please yourself. Byrd didn't have much power, no question about it. However, he was fast, much faster than anyone else that Klitschko beat. He was much better defesesvily than than anyone Klitschko beat.
Byrd actually has some decent wins. Take a look at his career. His victims list is a lot more impressive than anyone Povetkin, Haye, Peter etc.

Byrd is vastly under rated.

Byrd was good, but he was neither Wlad's best win nor best opponent.
I also think Byrd is very underrated..

[Ruthless-RKO]

Byrd is vastly under rated.

I also think Byrd is very underrated..

Byrd was good, but he was neither Wlad's best win nor best opponent.

At the time they fought he probably was to be honest.. Then Wlad went on to fight many more names...

[oogiebe]

[quote=Ruthless-RKO post_id=5073974 time=1546275455 user_id=137147]
[quote=oogiebe post_id=5073965 time=1546275101 user_id=53017]
[quote=Ruthless-RKO post_id=5073952 time=1546273658 user_id=137147]

I also think Byrd is very underrated..
[/quote]
Byrd was good, but he was neither Wlad's best win nor best opponent.
[/quote]

At the time they fought he probably was to be honest.. Then Wlad went on to fight many more names...
[/quote]
I agree that may well be true, but it wasn't the question. It's all debatable really.

[Ambling Alp II]

Oh please yourself. Byrd didn't have much power, no question about it. However, he was fast, much faster than anyone else that Klitschko beat. He was much better defesesvily than than anyone Klitschko beat.
Byrd actually has some decent wins. Take a look at his career. His victims list is a lot more impressive than anyone Povetkin, Haye, Peter etc.

Maybe only because of Tua. No one of the mentioned have the same caliber victim. Only Povetkin suddenly has Byrd himself. But what else Byrd had? Shot Holyfield? Robbery decision win over Oquendo? Or maybe robbery draw against Golota? Stop your delusion.

Only because of Tua? Well you can't just throw out someone's biggest win. Who the best fighter that someone beat should be the first thing that you look for when rating someone. And Tua was much better than anyone these other guys ever beat.

I agree that the holyfield fight doesn't mean much because Holyfield was way past it when Byrd fought him, however, you can't then turn around and look at Byrds fights when he himself was clearly past it and count hem.

I keep thinking that Byrd also beat someone else on his record that most people thinking is far better than anyone that Povetkin, Haye or Peter beat. Now who was that again? I think his brother was a fighter too.

Byrd had two victories over guys way better than anyone Haye, Peter, and Povetkin beat. He was clearly a better fighter. Not exactly brain surgery here.

[oogiebe]

Oh please yourself. Byrd didn't have much power, no question about it. However, he was fast, much faster than anyone else that Klitschko beat. He was much better defesesvily than than anyone Klitschko beat.
Byrd actually has some decent wins. Take a look at his career. His victims list is a lot more impressive than anyone Povetkin, Haye, Peter etc.

Maybe only because of Tua. No one of the mentioned have the same caliber victim. Only Povetkin suddenly has Byrd himself. But what else Byrd had? Shot Holyfield? Robbery decision win over Oquendo? Or maybe robbery draw against Golota? Stop your delusion.

Only because of Tua? Well you can't just throw out someone's biggest win. Who the best fighter that someone beat should be the first thing that you look for when rating someone. And Tua was much better than anyone these other guys ever beat.

I agree that the holyfield fight doesn't mean much because Holyfield was way past it when Byrd fought him, however, you can't then turn around and look at Byrds fights when he himself was clearly past it and count hem.

I keep thinking that Byrd also beat someone else on his record that most people thinking is far better than anyone that Povetkin, Haye or Peter beat. Now who was that again? I think his brother was a fighter too.

Byrd had two victories over guys way better than anyone Haye, Peter, and Povetkin beat. He was clearly a better fighter. Not exactly brain surgery here.

more like Brain Salad Surgery.

[Ambling Alp II]

Please. Your guys have virtually nothing.
Peter's biggest win is what?
Hayes niggest win is what?
Povtekins biggest is what?

[oogiebe]

Please. Your guys have virtually nothing.
Peter's biggest win is what?
Hayes niggest win is what?
Povtekins biggest is what?

Sounds like you're writing a R&B song. LOL! We've all said our piece. You are being redundant now.

[Ambling Alp II]

You can't even come up with any names. That speaks volumes.

[oogiebe]

You can't even come up with any names. That speaks volumes.

Do me a favor and re-read the entire post so you can see the umpteen times it's been said. I grow weary on this thread. I'm bored.

[Ambling Alp II]

I read the thread again.

Didn't see where you actually stated who the best fighter was that Haye, Povektkin or Peter ever beat.

Anyone of them remotely close to Byrd's wins over Tua and what's his name? (I'm assuming that you aren't going to count Povektins win against a 37 year old Byrd)

Inquiring minds would like to know.

[oogiebe]

I read the thread again.

Didn't see where you actually stated who the best fighter was that Haye, Povektkin or Peter ever beat.

Anyone of them remotely close to Byrd's wins over Tua and what's his name? (I'm assuming that you aren't going to count Povektins win against a 37 year old Byrd)

Inquiring minds would like to know.

Hit me up tomorrow. I'm getting into New Year mode. (two kids 10 and 12...I'm dada the entertainer!.)

[Ruthless-RKO]

Please. Your guys have virtually nothing.
Peter's biggest win is what?
Hayes niggest win is what?
Povtekins biggest is what?

Sounds like you're writing a R&B song. LOL! We've all said our piece. You are being redundant now.

So many ‘whats’ you’d think he’s DMX!

[Cojimar 1946]

Hasim Rahman's best win is better than Ali's best win
Riddick Bowe's best win is better than Joe Louis's best win

That's not an especially compelling argument.

[tiny_acres]

Hasim Rahman's best win is better than Ali's best win
Riddick Bowe's best win is better than Joe Louis's best win

That's not an especially compelling argument.

Ive tried to understand your point of view and keep an open mind through this topic.
You just completely lost me with this post.
Utter nonsense.

[oogiebe]

Hasim Rahman's best win is better than Ali's best win
Riddick Bowe's best win is better than Joe Louis's best win

That's not an especially compelling argument.

Ive tried to understand your point of view and keep an open mind through this topic.
You just completely lost me with this post.
Utter nonsense.

I think I get it. (ok now I'm scared). Rahman beat Lewis. Lewis can beat Frazier/Foreman ( ) Doesn't mean Rahman beats Ali.
Riddick Bowe beat Holyfield. Holyfield beats Walcott/Schmeling, etc. Doesn't mean Bowe beats Louis.

[DrDuke]

Oh please yourself. Byrd didn't have much power, no question about it. However, he was fast, much faster than anyone else that Klitschko beat. He was much better defesesvily than than anyone Klitschko beat.
Byrd actually has some decent wins. Take a look at his career. His victims list is a lot more impressive than anyone Povetkin, Haye, Peter etc.

Maybe only because of Tua. No one of the mentioned have the same caliber victim. Only Povetkin suddenly has Byrd himself. But what else Byrd had? Shot Holyfield? Robbery decision win over Oquendo? Or maybe robbery draw against Golota? Stop your delusion.

Only because of Tua? Well you can't just throw out someone's biggest win. Who the best fighter that someone beat should be the first thing that you look for when rating someone. And Tua was much better than anyone these other guys ever beat.

I agree that the holyfield fight doesn't mean much because Holyfield was way past it when Byrd fought him, however, you can't then turn around and look at Byrds fights when he himself was clearly past it and count hem.

I keep thinking that Byrd also beat someone else on his record that most people thinking is far better than anyone that Povetkin, Haye or Peter beat. Now who was that again? I think his brother was a fighter too.

Byrd had two victories over guys way better than anyone Haye, Peter, and Povetkin beat. He was clearly a better fighter. Not exactly brain surgery here.

I'm not throwing Tua win away from Byrd. However, you are talking about Tua, as if he was some superman. He was a pretty one-dimensional fighter, who could deliver his money punch very well. For example, Chagaev, whom Povetkin beat fair-and-square, could have appeared to be too much for Tua. And Peter defeated Maskaev in a more convincing fashion, than Tua, who had been outboxed and had been looking for his single puinch desperately. You gotta watch fights and analyze, not just point at the results and the names.

[Ambling Alp II]

Hasim Rahman's best win is better than Ali's best win
Riddick Bowe's best win is better than Joe Louis's best win

That's not an especially compelling argument.

Well no, Rahman's best win was not better than ali's best win. However, since you think the sport started in 2000, I can see where you came to that conclusion.

The best win is not the only factor to consider. However, it is a huge factor when rating a fighter. To dismiss it is ludicrous.

[Ambling Alp II]

Maybe only because of Tua. No one of the mentioned have the same caliber victim. Only Povetkin suddenly has Byrd himself. But what else Byrd had? Shot Holyfield? Robbery decision win over Oquendo? Or maybe robbery draw against Golota? Stop your delusion.

Only because of Tua? Well you can't just throw out someone's biggest win. Who the best fighter that someone beat should be the first thing that you look for when rating someone. And Tua was much better than anyone these other guys ever beat.

I agree that the holyfield fight doesn't mean much because Holyfield was way past it when Byrd fought him, however, you can't then turn around and look at Byrds fights when he himself was clearly past it and count hem.

I keep thinking that Byrd also beat someone else on his record that most people thinking is far better than anyone that Povetkin, Haye or Peter beat. Now who was that again? I think his brother was a fighter too.

Byrd had two victories over guys way better than anyone Haye, Peter, and Povetkin beat. He was clearly a better fighter. Not exactly brain surgery here.

I'm not throwing Tua win away from Byrd. However, you are talking about Tua, as if he was some superman. He was a pretty one-dimensional fighter, who could deliver his money punch very well. For example, Chagaev, whom Povetkin beat fair-and-square, could have appeared to be too much for Tua. And Peter defeated Maskaev in a more convincing fashion, than Tua, who had been outboxed and had been looking for his single puinch desperately. You gotta watch fights and analyze, not just point at the results and the names.

I'm not saying that Tua was some sort of superman. He had strengths and weaknesses. Just that he was better than anyone that Haye, Peter, or Povetkin beat.
Don't see how in the world you would say that could appear to be too much for Tua. That's ridiculous.

Maskaev was 39 years when Peter beat him. That fight should be dismissed entirely.

Byrd actually had some decent wins. He had Tua, and what's his name.
Peter, Povetkin, and Haye have nothing.

[DrDuke]

Only because of Tua? Well you can't just throw out someone's biggest win. Who the best fighter that someone beat should be the first thing that you look for when rating someone. And Tua was much better than anyone these other guys ever beat.

I agree that the holyfield fight doesn't mean much because Holyfield was way past it when Byrd fought him, however, you can't then turn around and look at Byrds fights when he himself was clearly past it and count hem.

I keep thinking that Byrd also beat someone else on his record that most people thinking is far better than anyone that Povetkin, Haye or Peter beat. Now who was that again? I think his brother was a fighter too.

Byrd had two victories over guys way better than anyone Haye, Peter, and Povetkin beat. He was clearly a better fighter. Not exactly brain surgery here.

I'm not throwing Tua win away from Byrd. However, you are talking about Tua, as if he was some superman. He was a pretty one-dimensional fighter, who could deliver his money punch very well. For example, Chagaev, whom Povetkin beat fair-and-square, could have appeared to be too much for Tua. And Peter defeated Maskaev in a more convincing fashion, than Tua, who had been outboxed and had been looking for his single puinch desperately. You gotta watch fights and analyze, not just point at the results and the names.

I'm not saying that Tua was some sort of superman. He had strengths and weaknesses. Just that he was better than anyone that Haye, Peter, or Povetkin beat.
Don't see how in the world you would say that could appear to be too much for Tua. That's ridiculous.

Maskaev was 39 years when Peter beat him. That fight should be dismissed entirely.

Byrd actually had some decent wins. He had Tua, and what's his name.
Peter, Povetkin, and Haye have nothing.

Maskaev was the World champ after defeating Rahman for the 2nd time. He was a decent scalp for Peter, especially acknowledging his ability to outbox different Tuas. Haye has a pretty poor HW resume, yeah. But how the hell Povetkin had nothing? What 'decent wins' of Byrd were better, than Povetkin's 'nothing'?

[Cojimar 1946]

Ali doesn't have a win on his resume to match a win over a prime Lennox Lewis. I would love to see you try to argue otherwise.

Byrd has a lot of subpar performances-the Ibeabuchi fight, the Oquendo robbery, the Golota draw. These have to be considered when comparing him to Pulev and Povetkin. He may have the better win but I don't think that makes him the better fighter. Pulev and Povetkin probably both beat Tua.

[Ambling Alp II]

Ali doesn't have a win on his resume to match a win over a prime Lennox Lewis. I would love to see you try to argue otherwise.

Byrd has a lot of subpar performances-the Ibeabuchi fight, the Oquendo robbery, the Golota draw. These have to be considered when comparing him to Pulev and Povetkin. He may have the better win but I don't think that makes him the better fighter. Pulev and Povetkin probably both beat Tua.

One guy first name was George. another's first name was Joe. Saw them fight a lot. They were better than Lewis. Then again, I go by how good they were, not when their career started.

[Ambling Alp II]

I'm not throwing Tua win away from Byrd. However, you are talking about Tua, as if he was some superman. He was a pretty one-dimensional fighter, who could deliver his money punch very well. For example, Chagaev, whom Povetkin beat fair-and-square, could have appeared to be too much for Tua. And Peter defeated Maskaev in a more convincing fashion, than Tua, who had been outboxed and had been looking for his single puinch desperately. You gotta watch fights and analyze, not just point at the results and the names.

I'm not saying that Tua was some sort of superman. He had strengths and weaknesses. Just that he was better than anyone that Haye, Peter, or Povetkin beat.
Don't see how in the world you would say that could appear to be too much for Tua. That's ridiculous.

Maskaev was 39 years when Peter beat him. That fight should be dismissed entirely.

Byrd actually had some decent wins. He had Tua, and what's his name.
Peter, Povetkin, and Haye have nothing.

Maskaev was the World champ after defeating Rahman for the 2nd time. He was a decent scalp for Peter, especially acknowledging his ability to outbox different Tuas. Haye has a pretty poor HW resume, yeah. But how the hell Povetkin had nothing? What 'decent wins' of Byrd were better, than Povetkin's 'nothing'?

Don't really care if Maskeav had a WBS title or not. He was well past it.
As for Byrd's superior wins- I referred to them several times already. One was obviously Tua. The other is on the top of my tongue.
also thought that outside of power (Byrd had almost none, Povetkin had a little) since Byrd was better then at just about everything should count for something. Maybe not.

[DrDuke]

I'm not saying that Tua was some sort of superman. He had strengths and weaknesses. Just that he was better than anyone that Haye, Peter, or Povetkin beat.
Don't see how in the world you would say that could appear to be too much for Tua. That's ridiculous.

Maskaev was 39 years when Peter beat him. That fight should be dismissed entirely.

Byrd actually had some decent wins. He had Tua, and what's his name.
Peter, Povetkin, and Haye have nothing.

Maskaev was the World champ after defeating Rahman for the 2nd time. He was a decent scalp for Peter, especially acknowledging his ability to outbox different Tuas. Haye has a pretty poor HW resume, yeah. But how the hell Povetkin had nothing? What 'decent wins' of Byrd were better, than Povetkin's 'nothing'?

Don't really care if Maskeav had a WBS title or not. He was well past it.
As for Byrd's superior wins- I referred to them several times already. One was obviously Tua. The other is on the top of my tongue.
also thought that outside of power (Byrd had almost none, Povetkin had a little) since Byrd was better then at just about everything should count for something. Maybe not.

According to the bouts prior to Peter one, Maskaev was still there, at least not much noticeably past it. And talking about Byrd wins, you was only mentioning Tua. I'm not taking it away from him, but it's a win, not wins. That's why I'm asking. And Povetkin was beating the top guys of his era pretty convincingly. It's only possible to argue on his win over Huck. And telling about Povetkin's power in a way, that 'Povetkin had a little' of it, is another shocker. Man, you are just too biased with old school. Everybody, who emerged in the 2000s, is always somehow tried to be discredited by you.