Re: Who ranks higher historically? Wlad or Mike Tyson
Posted: 29 Dec 2022, 13:10
I tend to argue that fighters have four phases in their careers generally. Vladimir Klitschko had 69 fights and his first loss was his 24th outing (Puritty) and he would not have another loss until his 41st outing and then his 44th outing. He wouldn't lose again until his 68th and 69th outing.
The first loss can be seen as something of a rookie mistake considering prior to Puritty the only opponents of consequence he fought was arguably Jerry Wimpy Halstead and Bigfoot Martin. Vladimir Klitschko was well ahead on the cards before gassing out and getting stopped. No real shame in it retrospectively considering Puritty took Tommy Morrison to hell and back, had beaten Joe Hipp by stoppage, and took several men the distance. Was a simple case of a raw and green heavyweight arguably being matched up a bit too tough.
Where the legitimate criticism comes in is the losses to Corrie Sanders and Lamon Brewster. I think most people would say that Sanders was one of the more underrated heavyweights of the past 30 years, and it was simply bad matchmaking because Sanders was picked to be a stepping stone before Vladimir Klitschko was to fight Lennox Lewis. Still it was quite the upset but I think retrospectively looking back on it it's not the upset that we all thought it was at the time. Depending on Sanders mood, as he preferred golfing over boxing, he legitimately was one of the top 10 heavyweights in the world. Forget what the rankings were at the time we all know how rating systems are easily manipulated where far lesser challengers and get rated high while more dangerous men are sometimes pushed outside the top 10.
Brewster is one of those guys whose prime was cut short due to a detached retina, but was certainly the goods considering he knocked out Andrew Golota in a single round. The same Golota who went the distance with Byrd (arguably robbed too) for the IBF title and went the distance with Ruiz for the WBA title in the previous two fights prior to Brewster for the WBO title. So it is not really all that surprising retrospectively that Vladimir Klitschko who was suffering with confidence issues following the Sanders bout to lose to Brewster, although it might be pointed out that following the fight Vladimir's blood samples showed his blood sugar was twice the normal range and a physician in Las Vegas also suggested that he may have been poisoned by a drug called Haloperidol. Even if you don't believe the latter most people who watched the fight insist something was wrong with Vladimir Klitschko during the contest.
So one loss you can dismiss because of rookie mistakes and another loss you can dismiss because of health issues going into the match. What cannot be dismissed is the loss to Sanders and retrospectively it's not too terrible considering how underrated Sanders really was. And in the long history of boxing one can find multiple instances in which good or great fighters lost matches that were pretty embarrassing. Maybe one of the best examples I can think of is Max Schmeling losing by first round knockout to light heavyweight Gipsy Daniels in 1928 just two short years before he would win the heavyweight title from Jack Sharkey.
And one must remember retrospectively that the WBO heavyweight title was not seen with the kind of credibility it has today. It was viewed like the IBO or IBC belts today. The only thing it meant back then was that you were now a top 10 or top 15 heavyweight. Klitschko being WBO champion when he lost to Sanders was not the same thing as being a WBA, WBC or IBF champion.
If you don't believe me on this recall a year or two back when everybody was talking about the difference between unified and undisputed and people were arguing that Lennox Lewis was not the true champion because he did not have the WBO title, which absolutely appalled Lennox Lewis:
https://www.ringtv.com/531581-lennox-le ... ion-world/
So when looking back on it you could only say that Vladimir Klitschko lost by stoppage to two other men who were rated also in the top 10 or 15 just like he was. I don't think that is too out of the ordinary for contenders to lose to other contenders. After all this is the fight game somebody has to lose. And again as pointed out Sanders was one of the more underrated boxers of his time and Brewster's prime was cut short due to eye issues so we arguably never got to see his full potential.
Now on to stage 3 of Klitschko's career.... he not only avenges the loss to Lamon Brewster, but defeats Samuel Peter after getting off the canvas three times to demonstrate that he did have heart, and when his brother Vitali retired in quick order he unified the majority of the heavyweight titles. Only the WBC title eluded him, and that was largely because his brother made a return to the ring and won that belt and them being siblings they were not going to fight each other. Vitali retires again, and Vladimir continues being the consensus man to beat. Not only did he never appear to be in any danger throughout his championship reign I don't think there was a single person who won a single round against Vladimir Klitschko until he fought Tyson Fury.
The confidence issues and the technical issues were essentially gone and the dramatic improvement from who he was to what he ended up being cannot be ignored. Yes the bulk of his matches were incredibly boring to watch and he could have knocked out people rather easily but he continued his cautious approach that Emmanuel Stewart designed for him. Every now and then he would knock people out but it was clear he was not trigger happy like he was when he was younger.
Now if you were to ask me in a head-to-head matchup who would win between Riddick Bowe and Vladimir Klitschko I would lean towards Riddick Bowe, because not only did he have the size to deal with Vladimir Klitschko but he also had the punching power and toughness and good hand speed to have been a nightmare for Vladimir Klitschko. Another underrated aspect of Riddick Bowe was that for a big man he was a pretty good infighter, something that Vladimir Klitschko never was any good at.
But if you're going to make an argument on the basis of opponents and quality wins you simply cannot argue that Riddick Bowe had a far greater resume than Vladimir Klitschko because quite frankly the only names worth mentioning on Riddick Bowe's record were men who were well passed their prime. Without Holyfield on the resume one can make the strong argument that Vladimir Klitschko had the better overall record:
Hasim Rahman, Samuel Peter (2x), Axel Schulz, Chris Byrd (2x), Frans Botha, Ray Mercer, Lamon Brewster, David Haye, Jean Marc Mormeck, Sultan Ibragimov, and that consists of twelve wins against alphabet champions or former undisputed champions or hall of fame opposition (before you argue you know as well as I do David Haye will be in the Hall of Fame as he is arguably one of the top five cruiserweights in boxing history).
That is clearly superior to Riddick Bowe having beaten the ghost of Michael Dokes and the shell of Pinklon Thomas and barely edging out a decision win over the Cincinnati Fatty Tony Tubbs who Mike Tyson knocked out in two rounds just four years before. Like I said if you're going to make an argument for Riddick Bowe being better than Vladimir Klitschko you're going to have to do it on the basis of hypothetical head-to-head matchups instead of the resume.
The first loss can be seen as something of a rookie mistake considering prior to Puritty the only opponents of consequence he fought was arguably Jerry Wimpy Halstead and Bigfoot Martin. Vladimir Klitschko was well ahead on the cards before gassing out and getting stopped. No real shame in it retrospectively considering Puritty took Tommy Morrison to hell and back, had beaten Joe Hipp by stoppage, and took several men the distance. Was a simple case of a raw and green heavyweight arguably being matched up a bit too tough.
Where the legitimate criticism comes in is the losses to Corrie Sanders and Lamon Brewster. I think most people would say that Sanders was one of the more underrated heavyweights of the past 30 years, and it was simply bad matchmaking because Sanders was picked to be a stepping stone before Vladimir Klitschko was to fight Lennox Lewis. Still it was quite the upset but I think retrospectively looking back on it it's not the upset that we all thought it was at the time. Depending on Sanders mood, as he preferred golfing over boxing, he legitimately was one of the top 10 heavyweights in the world. Forget what the rankings were at the time we all know how rating systems are easily manipulated where far lesser challengers and get rated high while more dangerous men are sometimes pushed outside the top 10.
Brewster is one of those guys whose prime was cut short due to a detached retina, but was certainly the goods considering he knocked out Andrew Golota in a single round. The same Golota who went the distance with Byrd (arguably robbed too) for the IBF title and went the distance with Ruiz for the WBA title in the previous two fights prior to Brewster for the WBO title. So it is not really all that surprising retrospectively that Vladimir Klitschko who was suffering with confidence issues following the Sanders bout to lose to Brewster, although it might be pointed out that following the fight Vladimir's blood samples showed his blood sugar was twice the normal range and a physician in Las Vegas also suggested that he may have been poisoned by a drug called Haloperidol. Even if you don't believe the latter most people who watched the fight insist something was wrong with Vladimir Klitschko during the contest.
So one loss you can dismiss because of rookie mistakes and another loss you can dismiss because of health issues going into the match. What cannot be dismissed is the loss to Sanders and retrospectively it's not too terrible considering how underrated Sanders really was. And in the long history of boxing one can find multiple instances in which good or great fighters lost matches that were pretty embarrassing. Maybe one of the best examples I can think of is Max Schmeling losing by first round knockout to light heavyweight Gipsy Daniels in 1928 just two short years before he would win the heavyweight title from Jack Sharkey.
And one must remember retrospectively that the WBO heavyweight title was not seen with the kind of credibility it has today. It was viewed like the IBO or IBC belts today. The only thing it meant back then was that you were now a top 10 or top 15 heavyweight. Klitschko being WBO champion when he lost to Sanders was not the same thing as being a WBA, WBC or IBF champion.
If you don't believe me on this recall a year or two back when everybody was talking about the difference between unified and undisputed and people were arguing that Lennox Lewis was not the true champion because he did not have the WBO title, which absolutely appalled Lennox Lewis:
https://www.ringtv.com/531581-lennox-le ... ion-world/
So when looking back on it you could only say that Vladimir Klitschko lost by stoppage to two other men who were rated also in the top 10 or 15 just like he was. I don't think that is too out of the ordinary for contenders to lose to other contenders. After all this is the fight game somebody has to lose. And again as pointed out Sanders was one of the more underrated boxers of his time and Brewster's prime was cut short due to eye issues so we arguably never got to see his full potential.
Now on to stage 3 of Klitschko's career.... he not only avenges the loss to Lamon Brewster, but defeats Samuel Peter after getting off the canvas three times to demonstrate that he did have heart, and when his brother Vitali retired in quick order he unified the majority of the heavyweight titles. Only the WBC title eluded him, and that was largely because his brother made a return to the ring and won that belt and them being siblings they were not going to fight each other. Vitali retires again, and Vladimir continues being the consensus man to beat. Not only did he never appear to be in any danger throughout his championship reign I don't think there was a single person who won a single round against Vladimir Klitschko until he fought Tyson Fury.
The confidence issues and the technical issues were essentially gone and the dramatic improvement from who he was to what he ended up being cannot be ignored. Yes the bulk of his matches were incredibly boring to watch and he could have knocked out people rather easily but he continued his cautious approach that Emmanuel Stewart designed for him. Every now and then he would knock people out but it was clear he was not trigger happy like he was when he was younger.
Now if you were to ask me in a head-to-head matchup who would win between Riddick Bowe and Vladimir Klitschko I would lean towards Riddick Bowe, because not only did he have the size to deal with Vladimir Klitschko but he also had the punching power and toughness and good hand speed to have been a nightmare for Vladimir Klitschko. Another underrated aspect of Riddick Bowe was that for a big man he was a pretty good infighter, something that Vladimir Klitschko never was any good at.
But if you're going to make an argument on the basis of opponents and quality wins you simply cannot argue that Riddick Bowe had a far greater resume than Vladimir Klitschko because quite frankly the only names worth mentioning on Riddick Bowe's record were men who were well passed their prime. Without Holyfield on the resume one can make the strong argument that Vladimir Klitschko had the better overall record:
Hasim Rahman, Samuel Peter (2x), Axel Schulz, Chris Byrd (2x), Frans Botha, Ray Mercer, Lamon Brewster, David Haye, Jean Marc Mormeck, Sultan Ibragimov, and that consists of twelve wins against alphabet champions or former undisputed champions or hall of fame opposition (before you argue you know as well as I do David Haye will be in the Hall of Fame as he is arguably one of the top five cruiserweights in boxing history).
That is clearly superior to Riddick Bowe having beaten the ghost of Michael Dokes and the shell of Pinklon Thomas and barely edging out a decision win over the Cincinnati Fatty Tony Tubbs who Mike Tyson knocked out in two rounds just four years before. Like I said if you're going to make an argument for Riddick Bowe being better than Vladimir Klitschko you're going to have to do it on the basis of hypothetical head-to-head matchups instead of the resume.
