BoxRec

Concerning Samuel Peter and the Ring Magazine annual ratings, he was #9 in 2005 & #3 in 2006 & #2 in 2007 & #7 in 2008. Of course he had different ratings in the alphabet organizations. This is why I always preferred KO Magazine because they included the ratings for all four organizations in their monthly publications.

As for Calvin Brock, he was #7 in 2005. He never appeared in the top 10 at any other time. It is kind of funny looking back on the ratings where you had someone like Denis Boystov be in the top ten for 4 years straight (2009-2012) but for the life of me I can't remember one significant win that he even had. I do know for a very brief time he was scheduled to face Tyson Fury but it never happened.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 16:56

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 11:47 Norton didn't do much aside from beating Ali. I don't think I would put him in the hall of fame. It would be like putting Oliver McCall in the hall of fame

First I suggest that you watch Ken Norton fight. If you did, you would not say that.

Norton was competitive against Ali (albiet not a prime Ali) 3x. Not just once.
Gave a prime Larry Holmes all that he could handle in one of the greatest fights of all time.
Beat Jimmy Young in a great fight.
Stopped Jerry Quarry.

Finally we agree!

oogiebe wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 21:52

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 16:56

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 11:47 Norton didn't do much aside from beating Ali. I don't think I would put him in the hall of fame. It would be like putting Oliver McCall in the hall of fame

First I suggest that you watch Ken Norton fight. If you did, you would not say that.

Norton was competitive against Ali (albiet not a prime Ali) 3x. Not just once.
Gave a prime Larry Holmes all that he could handle in one of the greatest fights of all time.
Beat Jimmy Young in a great fight.
Stopped Jerry Quarry.

Finally we agree!

Norton's career is definitely far above McCall's.

McCall had the better chin, but McCall had a better chin than damn near everyone

Norton did pretty much everything else better.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 21:53

oogiebe wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 21:52

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 16:56

First I suggest that you watch Ken Norton fight. If you did, you would not say that.

Norton was competitive against Ali (albiet not a prime Ali) 3x. Not just once.
Gave a prime Larry Holmes all that he could handle in one of the greatest fights of all time.
Beat Jimmy Young in a great fight.
Stopped Jerry Quarry.

Finally we agree!

Norton's career is definitely far above McCall's.

McCall had the better chin, but McCall had a better chin than damn near everyone

Norton did pretty much everything else better.

Norton was 3 levels above McCall.
I agree 100% that McCalls chin is better than nearly anyone. In my opinion I think he had the best chin ever.If there was a hall of fame for just chins he would be in it

HomicideHenry wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 20:19 Concerning Samuel Peter and the Ring Magazine annual ratings, he was #9 in 2005 & #3 in 2006 & #2 in 2007 & #7 in 2008. Of course he had different ratings in the alphabet organizations. This is why I always preferred KO Magazine because they included the ratings for all four organizations in their monthly publications.

As for Calvin Brock, he was #7 in 2005. He never appeared in the top 10 at any other time. It is kind of funny looking back on the ratings where you had someone like Denis Boystov be in the top ten for 4 years straight (2009-2012) but for the life of me I can't remember one significant win that he even had. I do know for a very brief time he was scheduled to face Tyson Fury but it never happened.

For some reason, if Wlad had beaten Boystov some would consider it a big win because he was a top ten contender for some time.

Jaywheel wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 11:06

HomicideHenry wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 20:19 Concerning Samuel Peter and the Ring Magazine annual ratings, he was #9 in 2005 & #3 in 2006 & #2 in 2007 & #7 in 2008. Of course he had different ratings in the alphabet organizations. This is why I always preferred KO Magazine because they included the ratings for all four organizations in their monthly publications.

As for Calvin Brock, he was #7 in 2005. He never appeared in the top 10 at any other time. It is kind of funny looking back on the ratings where you had someone like Denis Boystov be in the top ten for 4 years straight (2009-2012) but for the life of me I can't remember one significant win that he even had. I do know for a very brief time he was scheduled to face Tyson Fury but it never happened.

For some reason, if Wlad had beaten Boystov some would consider it a big win because he was a top ten contender for some time.

Bullsh1t. No one takes seriously Lepai, who defeated Boytsov. Yet it doesn't mean, that Klit didn't have good defences.

Bullshit? Apparently Sam Peter is a meaningful and relevant win for Wlad. The guy had 1 name on his resume when he fought Wlad the first time and it was Taurus Sykes. Boystov beat Vinnie Maddalone. Should be enough to be a credible and meaningful Wlad opponent.

Jaywheel wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 11:26 Bullshit? Apparently Sam Peter is a meaningful and relevant win for Wlad. The guy had 1 name on his resume when he fought Wlad the first time and it was Taurus Sykes. Boystov beat Vinnie Maddalone. Should be enough to be a credible and meaningful Wlad opponent.

Why on earth you should name Peter first? Again you pick some mediocre defence (yet relatively meaningful, far from the worst ones). It's like saying, that Ali defended majorly against the likes of Dunn or Evangelista.

I'm not the one who brought Peter up. I know he sucks. It's some of you guys that say it's a meaningful win. I could name other greats like Corrie Sanders or Ross Purrity but Wlad was ko'ed by them.

Jaywheel wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 11:06

HomicideHenry wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 20:19 Concerning Samuel Peter and the Ring Magazine annual ratings, he was #9 in 2005 & #3 in 2006 & #2 in 2007 & #7 in 2008. Of course he had different ratings in the alphabet organizations. This is why I always preferred KO Magazine because they included the ratings for all four organizations in their monthly publications.

As for Calvin Brock, he was #7 in 2005. He never appeared in the top 10 at any other time. It is kind of funny looking back on the ratings where you had someone like Denis Boystov be in the top ten for 4 years straight (2009-2012) but for the life of me I can't remember one significant win that he even had. I do know for a very brief time he was scheduled to face Tyson Fury but it never happened.

For some reason, if Wlad had beaten Boystov some would consider it a big win because he was a top ten contender for some time.

There's a difference between a big win and notable win.

I'd say Wlad really only has a handful of Big wins. They being Haye, Povetkin and Byrd.

But he has other wins that are more significant than say some bums he was knocking out in his first 10 fights.

Jaywheel wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 11:26 Bullshit? Apparently Sam Peter is a meaningful and relevant win for Wlad. The guy had 1 name on his resume when he fought Wlad the first time and it was Taurus Sykes. Boystov beat Vinnie Maddalone. Should be enough to be a credible and meaningful Wlad opponent.

Sam Peter IS a meaningful win, and it's only with hindsight that he's not. At the time that that fight went down in 2005, Wlad was the underdog, he was basically considered a big name with no chin for Sam Peter to launch himself into title shot position against.

He upset the apple cart and beat Sam Peter.

It's not the biggest win anyone ever got, no, but it got Wlad back into a prominent position where getting a shot was possible.

Anytime the Boxing world is beginning to write you off, and get an upset win that keeps you relevant it's significant for your career certainly, and in this case it was the 1st step toward Wlad beginning his lengthy Heavyweight title reign.

Hey by the way. For the people that keep bringing up the Sanders and Purrity defeats as if that just dismisses everything Wlad achieved afterward.

Ya know, I seem to recall Manny Pacquiao was beaten twice by some guys nobody has ever heard prior to beating Barrera.

I guess Pacquiao never did a goddamn thing either huh?

I mean....according to you guys' logic that MUST be the case right?

Jaywheel wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 11:42 I'm not the one who brought Peter up. I know he sucks. It's some of you guys that say it's a meaningful win. I could name other greats like Corrie Sanders or Ross Purrity but Wlad was ko'ed by them.

The likes of Povetkin, Haye, Rahman, Chagaev, Ibragimov, Pulev, were good defences, yet you need to concentrate on those. You even mentioned only Sanders and Purrity without Brewster, since the least was destroyed in the rematch.

DrDuke wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 11:59

Jaywheel wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 11:42 I'm not the one who brought Peter up. I know he sucks. It's some of you guys that say it's a meaningful win. I could name other greats like Corrie Sanders or Ross Purrity but Wlad was ko'ed by them.

The likes of Povetkin, Haye, Rahman, Chagaev, Ibragimov, Pulev, were good defences, yet you need to concentrate on those. You even mentioned only Sanders and Purrity without Brewster, since the least was destroyed in the rematch.

Rahman is a bigger name historically due to the win over Lennox Lewis, but at the time Wlad fought him Rahman was absolutely shot to pieces.

Sam Peter the 1st time around was a much tougher fight.

Sam Peter the 2nd time Wlad fought him, was just a target.

HomicideHenry wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 20:19 Concerning Samuel Peter and the Ring Magazine annual ratings, he was #9 in 2005 & #3 in 2006 & #2 in 2007 & #7 in 2008.

The best win of Peter's entire career was against a 38 year old former middleweight.

That is how desperate Klitschko apologists are. They need to prop up guys that simply weren't that good.

Why Haye is a big title defense? Outside of Fantasy Fights, who did he ever beat that made him a major opponent?
Valuev? How impressive.

Same with. Povetkin.
Povetkin beat Chagaev. What a huge win. What else? Klitschko apologists are.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 12:15 That is how desperate Klitschko apologists are. They need to prop up guys that simply weren't that good.

Why Haye is a big title defense? Outside of Fantasy Fights, who did he ever beat that made him a major opponent?
Valuev? How impressive.

Same with. Povetkin.
Povetkin beat Chagaev. What a huge win. What else? Klitschko apologists are.

Haye was an ccomplished CW and Povetkin has been a top contender for a decade. In any case, no one here calls all them greats. If some like you have butthurt from Klit, it doesn't mean, that others are his 'apologists'.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 11:57 Hey by the way. For the people that keep bringing up the Sanders and Purrity defeats as if that just dismisses everything Wlad achieved afterward.

Ya know, I seem to recall Manny Pacquiao was beaten twice by some guys nobody has ever heard prior to beating Barrera.

I guess Pacquiao never did a goddamn thing either huh?

I mean....according to you guys' logic that MUST be the case right?

You don't see the difference that the actual big wins against HOFers do negate the early losses? Where are the HW's equivalents of Barrera, Morales, JMM, Mosley and al. on Wlad's resume?

Jaywheel wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 12:24

gilgamesh wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 11:57 Hey by the way. For the people that keep bringing up the Sanders and Purrity defeats as if that just dismisses everything Wlad achieved afterward.

Ya know, I seem to recall Manny Pacquiao was beaten twice by some guys nobody has ever heard prior to beating Barrera.

I guess Pacquiao never did a goddamn thing either huh?

I mean....according to you guys' logic that MUST be the case right?

You don't see the difference that the actual big wins against HOFers do negate the early losses? Where are the HW's equivalents of Barrera, Morales, JMM, Mosley and al. on Wlad's resume?

There aren't any, but the Pacquiao that beat Barrera, Morales, JMM is understandably considered to be improved upon the version that lost those early fights right?

So why does the same thing not apply to Wlad?

Wlad can't be credited with improvement?

Obviously his resume isn't on par with Pac's as Pac is 2nd only to Mayweather as the best fighter so far of the 21st century, but the bounce back from early career losses to go on to their greatest triumphs, they do have that in common.

Virtually nobody brings up Pac's early losses as a mark against him anymore. They're completely dismissed for the most part.

I'm just pointing out there's a Double Standard here.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 12:15 That is how desperate Klitschko apologists are. They need to prop up guys that simply weren't that good.

Why Haye is a big title defense? Outside of Fantasy Fights, who did he ever beat that made him a major opponent?
Valuev? How impressive.

Same with. Povetkin.
Povetkin beat Chagaev. What a huge win. What else? Klitschko apologists are.

I don't know that we're Klitschko apologists as much as you've shifted into that "Nothing can ever be as good as back in my day" type old man.

The kids need to turn that goddamn music down right Alp?

If Pac had spent his career knocking out guys like Jason Litzau, no I would not marvel at his « improvement ».

Jaywheel wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 12:31 If Pac had spent his career knocking out guys like Jason Litzau, no I would not marvel at his « improvement ».

You guys are ridiculous.

Jason Litzau was what? A Top 25-ish type guy? So that's as good as any of the guys Wlad ever beat?

Why don't you just admit you f*cking hate the guy, and don't wanna give him any credit.

Hell I admit it about David Haye, and even I will reluctantly give him credit where it's due, but you'll never see me picking Haye to win a Mythical Matchup because I don't have to, and I don't want to

Wlad would win a fight but Floyd is the greater fighter. Especially wrt historical legacy.

(Then) youngest champ, first 2* champ. He has some grand wins and was a tangible social force.

He's also a far more interesting character.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 12:30

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 12:15 That is how desperate Klitschko apologists are. They need to prop up guys that simply weren't that good.

Why Haye is a big title defense? Outside of Fantasy Fights, who did he ever beat that made him a major opponent?
Valuev? How impressive.

Same with. Povetkin.
Povetkin beat Chagaev. What a huge win. What else? Klitschko apologists are.

I don't know that we're Klitschko apologists as much as you've shifted into that "Nothing can ever be as good as back in my day" type old man.

The kids need to turn that goddamn music down right Alp?

Not at all. If the guy was great, he was great. doesn't matter when he fought to me. There have been good-great fighters in the 1990s and 2000s. There were bad fighters way before my time and when I first became a fan. The heavyweight division has just sucked for a long time and I'm not going to pretend it hasn't. Maybe it will be good again in a few years, who knows.
The Klitschko get credit for "achievements" that really aren't that impressive when you look at it hard. There are always excuses for their losses. Sometimes they even credit for their losses.
Weight classes go up and down. The middle weight division was weak in the mid-late 1970s. Name a period and I will tell you what I think.

You and some others who seem to think the sport magically got better the day they became a fan.

I was never like that. I didn't assume that the guys before my time weren't as good. Some were better, some worse.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 15:13

gilgamesh wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 12:30

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 12:15 That is how desperate Klitschko apologists are. They need to prop up guys that simply weren't that good.

Why Haye is a big title defense? Outside of Fantasy Fights, who did he ever beat that made him a major opponent?
Valuev? How impressive.

Same with. Povetkin.
Povetkin beat Chagaev. What a huge win. What else? Klitschko apologists are.

I don't know that we're Klitschko apologists as much as you've shifted into that "Nothing can ever be as good as back in my day" type old man.

The kids need to turn that goddamn music down right Alp?

Not at all. If the guy was great, he was great. doesn't matter when he fought to me. There have been good-great fighters in the 1990s and 2000s. There were bad fighters way before my time and when I first became a fan. The heavyweight division has just sucked for a long time and I'm not going to pretend it hasn't. Maybe it will be good again in a few years, who knows.
The Klitschko get credit for "achievements" that really aren't that impressive when you look at it hard. There are always excuses for their losses. Sometimes they even credit for their losses.
Weight classes go up and down. The middle weight division was weak in the mid-late 1970s. Name a period and I will tell you what I think.

You and some others who seem to think the sport magically got better the day they became a fan.

I was never like that. I didn't assume that the guys before my time weren't as good. Some were better, some worse.

See, that right there. What is that?What about anything I've ever said would suggest I think like that as a fan? Have you seen my Top 20 all time P4P List? Does it look like a guy who think Boxing didn't exist before he started watching it?

I got Greb, Langford, Robinson, Armstrong and Ezzard Charles in my Top 5.

I don't dismiss any fighter from any era. Though I think in all fairness you can rule out the guys from say the 1700's when the rules were so wildly different it was literally a different sport.

But that's a whole different conversation. We need the Broughton Rules fellow for that

It's ridiculous however to say that Wladimir Klitschko's achievements aren't impressive when out of 100 plus years of Heavyweight Boxing only 2 other guys have done something similar to what he's done in terms of length of reign. And they're both widely considered all time Top 3-5.

Is he on their level? No.

But is it ridiculous to say he's not too terribly far behind? Also no.