BoxRec

Best Coast wrote: ↑09 May 2019, 20:53 Thanks for clarifying that!! I had a hunch you were not really on board with Wlad but saw him as the default answer to ValMar's specific question.

Best Coast wrote: ↑09 May 2019, 03:50 Beg to differ mate. Wlad was HW champ from 2000-2003 as well as 2006-2015 and the thread title says since 2000 so you cant ignore his first title reign.

Here's the HWs Wlad never faced although Wlad was HW champ when each of them was still competing at world-level as HWs. Wlad Klitschko studiously avoided all the fighters listed below because he had already been so badly exposed by vastly inferior fighters like Corrie Sanders and Lamon Brewster:

Lennox Lewis
Ike Ibeabuchi
David Tua
Roy Jones Jr
James Toney

SenorPipino wrote: ↑09 May 2019, 21:22 Wlad was hardly great. Knockout defeats to the ordinary and thin competition as champion.

But nevertheless, he qualifies as dominant.

jamamb wrote: ↑09 May 2019, 20:59 bizarre list, ike for one didnt even fight in the 2000s

wlad vigorously ducked roy jones and james toney? um, okay

i mean how does he even duck roy when roy had 1 fight then moved right back down

squiggy wrote: ↑09 May 2019, 18:26 (Obviously it depends when you start counting.)

Paci wrote: ↑10 May 2019, 08:23 After Floyd comes Wlad in my book.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑09 May 2019, 22:34 You'd have to assume you start counting in 2000. He also has him in losses, I won't hold the last two against him as I actually think aj was the best performance of his career, but 4 losses with 3 by ko is more dominant than a clean slate? Cmon

squiggy wrote: ↑10 May 2019, 13:26 It was Lennox Lewis's division in 2000. Wlad was peripheral.

jamamb wrote: ↑10 May 2019, 14:16 the arguement for wlad there would be that he was clear 1 in his division for longer then joe was. joe was actually underdog vs lacy and hadnt seperated himself from all the others at the time, and then he only fought like a couple times more at 168

jamamb wrote: ↑10 May 2019, 14:20 those two fights werent even title fights or at smw

joe had lots of defenses but was never the clear man at 168 till the very end of his time there

jamamb wrote: ↑10 May 2019, 14:24 better has nothing to do with it, i think joe was a lot better then wlad , but wlad had a longer period of being way head and shoulders above the rest of the guys in his division

joe had lots of defenses but could not have said to be the clear man till the very last 2 of those, then he left smw

jamamb wrote: ↑10 May 2019, 14:28 i think wlad was more dominant (bigger gap between him and the rest) for a stretch then joe ever was, in part because of the weak hw opposition at the times

jamamb wrote: ↑10 May 2019, 14:16 the arguement for wlad there would be that he was clear 1 in his division for longer then joe was. joe was actually underdog vs lacy and hadnt seperated himself from all the others at the time, and then he only fought 1 more year at 168. he didnt beat kessler (then undefeated) till his very last smw fight too. so he didnt really have a prolonged period where he was dominant and the head and shoulders above over the rest of the division

oogiebe wrote: ↑10 May 2019, 14:19 Nah. It's performance based. I don't buy that. 17-0 during from 2000-2007 all defending one title. Then the two fights with Hopkins and RJJ.

squiggy wrote: ↑10 May 2019, 15:12 Those last two fights bring up his performance at a second weight class (and one he was never champion of). If it's a conversation that isn't focused on one reign in one division, I imagine the question would've just been "who's the greatest P4P since 2000."

squiggy wrote: ↑10 May 2019, 15:12 Those last two fights bring up his performance at a second weight class (and one he was never champion of). If it's a conversation that isn't focused on one reign in one division, I imagine the question would've just been "who's the greatest P4P since 2000."