WelshDevil wrote:crusader wrote:WelshDevil wrote:
I respect your opinion though can't categorically say its right or wrong. I do believe however that age and lack of training will reduce a fighters power along with sharpness in which to throw a punch.
On the point of Klitschko's longevity, that is true compared to Haye but that doesn't mean that what Wlad could do ability wise 3 years ago he will be able to do now. Also, I obviously think Haye is better than anyone they have faced including oldman Lennox.
Ok. Let's be fair though, Ruiz was 38 and Valuev was 36, Haye has been fighting 'old men' as well.
OK. So Ruiz and Valuev were classed as punchers in your World? Why do you rate them as punchers cos I can't see anything on there records that suggest that?
My point is that if Lennox gets labelled an old man, they should be as well. Punchers usually fair well when they get up there in age, it is the other attributes that tend to go first. Ruiz and Valuev are/were not punchers, but most fighters of that age are not as good as they once were. Therefore, it is unfair to discredit Vitali's chin because he fought an older Lewis, unless you discredit Haye's performance against an equally faded Ruiz or the older Valuev. When you do this (and even if you give Haye full credit for those wins) I have difficulty seeing what the basis is for ranking Haye above the Klitschkos.
I get that Haye looked flashy and spectacular against Ruiz, Barrett, and Enzo, and that he was able to climb off the canvas and beat a tough cruiserweight in Mormeck, but to me, that does not mean he is the best heavyweight in the world. None of those opponents are better than the fighters who the Klitschkos constantly get slated for beating (see above posts). Each to his own, I guess.
I really hope this messy situation with Haye and the Klitschkos gets sorted out within the next year so we have a definitive answer.
