BoxRec

Ruthless-RKO wrote:Not his best win, but his performance against Pulev showed signed of his old self.

That was his last big performance. To go from looking that good to the level he fought at against Jennings and Fury is pretty strange. He was caught a few times against Pulev because Pulev had a go but still looked top class.

Stuarty30 wrote:

Ruthless-RKO wrote:Not his best win, but his performance against Pulev showed signed of his old self.

That was his last big performance. To go from looking that good to the level he fought at against Jennings and Fury is pretty strange. He was caught a few times against Pulev because Pulev had a go but still looked top class.

I agree. Age is a bugger, his performance against Jennings led me and my dad to say he would lose his next fight regardless of who it was. Maybe that was a bit of an over exaggeration as I'm still sure there's plenty he can beat but father time has definitely caught up to him.

prime sam peter back in 2006

punchoutsb wrote:
Experience is an absolute; you either have it or you don't. If you're speaking and thinking so moronically for this fight why would anyone give you the benefit of the doubt for any other?

Why is it so hard to understand that experience counts for less in some matchups than others?

Stuarty30 wrote: That was his last big performance. To go from looking that good to the level he fought at against Jennings and Fury is pretty strange. He was caught a few times against Pulev because Pulev had a go but still looked top class.

It's because Pulev presented his chin on a platter that Wlad looked so good. Not having to go looking for a guy (like he had to vs Ibragimov), plus flat footed, plus attacking crudely and reaching in with single shots = the perfect Wlad opponent.

Then it was back to looking garbage vs Jennings, who while wasn't very good, showed some movement.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:
Experience is an absolute; you either have it or you don't. If you're speaking and thinking so moronically for this fight why would anyone give you the benefit of the doubt for any other?

Why is it so hard to understand that experience counts for less in some matchups than others?

Stuarty30 wrote: That was his last big performance. To go from looking that good to the level he fought at against Jennings and Fury is pretty strange. He was caught a few times against Pulev because Pulev had a go but still looked top class.

It's because Pulev presented his chin on a platter that Wlad looked so good. Not having to go looking for a guy (like he had to vs Ibragimov), plus flat footed, plus attacking crudely and reaching in with single shots = the perfect Wlad opponent.

Then it was back to looking garbage vs Jennings, who while wasn't very good, showed some movement.

Pulev had a go to be fair. He caught Wlad a few times. It was good to see Wlad attack for a change.

The pounding he gave to Brewster or Peter in the re-matches.

Ibragimov and Povetkin at their best. The Povetkin fight took place in Russia.

Byrd II, Haye, and Chagaev

Wlad has a lot of impressive performances. While some were one sided and dull, half of that is because his opponent didn't want to get knocked out.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:
Experience is an absolute; you either have it or you don't. If you're speaking and thinking so moronically for this fight why would anyone give you the benefit of the doubt for any other?

Why is it so hard to understand that experience counts for less in some matchups than others?

Unless Joshua wins with the first punch he throws, experience will play a factor. Experience is already playing a factor and the fight hasn't even started yet. I do understand why you don't understand that though

Wlad's best wins in order

1-Peter (first fight, saved Wlads career he fought great wouldn't have won with out Manny Steward in the corner)

2-Haye- Boring fight but cleared up all questions of who the best heavy weight around that period was.

3- Pulev KO Wlad was showing age a little was bending in will and chin a little and then turned the fight around with massive KO by far the most pleasing win to watch.

4-Byrd fight the second one when Wlad won and redeemed his loss.

victor-romeo wrote:Wlad's best wins in order

1-Peter (first fight, saved Wlads career he fought great wouldn't have won with out Manny Steward in the corner)

2-Haye- Boring fight but cleared up all questions of who the best heavy weight around that period was.

3- Pulev KO Wlad was showing age a little was bending in will and chin a little and then turned the fight around with massive KO by far the most pleasing win to watch.

4-Byrd fight the second one when Wlad won and redeemed his loss.

..redeemed his brother's loss?

Judging by the obsession with Povetkin on here then surely that win rivals Frazier-Ali 1.

greg wrote:

victor-romeo wrote:Wlad's best wins in order

1-Peter (first fight, saved Wlads career he fought great wouldn't have won with out Manny Steward in the corner)

2-Haye- Boring fight but cleared up all questions of who the best heavy weight around that period was.

3- Pulev KO Wlad was showing age a little was bending in will and chin a little and then turned the fight around with massive KO by far the most pleasing win to watch.

4-Byrd fight the second one when Wlad won and redeemed his loss.

..redeemed his brother's loss?

Good catch, I don't know why I thought they fought twice with Byrd winning one and losing one, but you are right, I still remember the Wlad's victory over Byrd probably the 2nd time(after looking in boxrec records seeing the fought twice an Wlad won both) they fought though and thought what a cool win.

victor-romeo wrote:

greg wrote:

victor-romeo wrote:Wlad's best wins in order

1-Peter (first fight, saved Wlads career he fought great wouldn't have won with out Manny Steward in the corner)

2-Haye- Boring fight but cleared up all questions of who the best heavy weight around that period was.

3- Pulev KO Wlad was showing age a little was bending in will and chin a little and then turned the fight around with massive KO by far the most pleasing win to watch.

4-Byrd fight the second one when Wlad won and redeemed his loss.

..redeemed his brother's loss?

Good catch, I don't know why I thought they fought twice with Byrd winning one and losing one, but you are right, I still remember the Wlad's victory over Byrd probably the 2nd time(after looking in boxrec records seeing the fought twice an Wlad won both) they fought though and thought what a cool win.

Not your fault, a ridiculous majority combine their resumes. At least you recognized the mistake. If the Spinks brothers could combine they'd have 3 wins over the top 5 all time heavyweights!

ElJefe wrote:Judging by the obsession with Povetkin on here then surely that win rivals Frazier-Ali 1.

Povetkin's fans here consider this fight as Povetkin's convincing win He punched Wlad's fists with his face very hard

punchoutsb wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:
Experience is an absolute; you either have it or you don't. If you're speaking and thinking so moronically for this fight why would anyone give you the benefit of the doubt for any other?

Why is it so hard to understand that experience counts for less in some matchups than others?

Unless Joshua wins with the first punch he throws, experience will play a factor. Experience is already playing a factor and the fight hasn't even started yet. I do understand why you don't understand that though

What about the second punch he throws? What if Wlad throws nothing? Would Wlad staring at Joshua be asserting his experience? How about doing a chicken dance? Hitting the canvas? He sure has experience of that.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:
Why is it so hard to understand that experience counts for less in some matchups than others?

Unless Joshua wins with the first punch he throws, experience will play a factor. Experience is already playing a factor and the fight hasn't even started yet. I do understand why you don't understand that though

What about the second punch he throws? What if Wlad throws nothing? Would Wlad staring at Joshua be asserting his experience? How about doing a chicken dance? Hitting the canvas? He sure has experience of that.

I don't think I've ever met anyone that didn't know what experience is. Congratulations, you're among the least intelligent people I've encountered.

punchoutsb wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:
Unless Joshua wins with the first punch he throws, experience will play a factor. Experience is already playing a factor and the fight hasn't even started yet. I do understand why you don't understand that though

What about the second punch he throws? What if Wlad throws nothing? Would Wlad staring at Joshua be asserting his experience? How about doing a chicken dance? Hitting the canvas? He sure has experience of that.

I don't think I've ever met anyone that didn't know what experience is. Congratulations, you're among the least intelligent people I've encountered.

Awww, look how sad you are that someone dares to question your beloved Wlad. You're the one not making sense here buddy. it's not complicated at all.

let's wheel out larry holmes to fight Joshua. he might not have a chance, but at least he'll have experience, right up to the third or maybe fourth punch that Joshua lands.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:
What about the second punch he throws? What if Wlad throws nothing? Would Wlad staring at Joshua be asserting his experience? How about doing a chicken dance? Hitting the canvas? He sure has experience of that.

I don't think I've ever met anyone that didn't know what experience is. Congratulations, you're among the least intelligent people I've encountered.

Awww, look how sad you are that someone dares to question your beloved Wlad. You're the one not making sense here buddy. it's not complicated at all.

let's wheel out larry holmes to fight Joshua. he might not have a chance, but at least he'll have experience, right up to the third or maybe fourth punch that Joshua lands.

So you're also unable to tell the difference between a 67 year old man and a 41 year old man. Why am I not surprised?

It was an extreme example. sometimes you need them. Wlad will stand there and do nothing for as long as this contest lasts. His experience will count for as much as Larry's would. None. Unless you want to be pedantic and say that wlad might last a couple rounds more than Larry. Which is saying his experience would count for whatever lasting three rounds is worth. which isn't a lot, for someone who is regarded like wlad is, shot or otherwise.

if Wlad were someone who actually had experience of dealing with a guy with the combination of range and power of Joshua before, it might be different. He doesn't. Because in a historical context, which is how people seem to be judging him, his record sucks and he was at least in trouble vs anyone who carried power and took it to him.

Riddick Blowe wrote:It was an extreme example. sometimes you need them. Wlad will stand there and do nothing for as long as this contest lasts. His experience will count for as much as Larry's would. None. Unless you want to be pedantic and say that wlad might last a couple rounds more than Larry. Which is saying his experience would count for whatever lasting three rounds is worth. which isn't a lot, for someone who is regarded like wlad is, shot or otherwise.

if Wlad were someone who actually had experience of dealing with a guy with the combination of range and power of Joshua before, it might be different. He doesn't. Because in a historical context, which is how people seem to be judging him, his record sucks and he was at least in trouble vs anyone who carried power and took it to him.

Best in terms of opponent quality or performance?

OK, we are discussing Wlad, so perhaps I should not mention anything about performance . While I agree that Wlad deserves ATG status based on longevity, dominance and number of defences (and judging from interviews he seems to be great guy outside the ring), most of his performances are unwatchable or close to it.

Anyway, I would go with:

1) Haye (the best opponent IMO, and - at least potentially - most dangerous one)
2) Byrd (stylewise made for Wlad, and would lose probably 10 times out of 10, but was top5 fighter easily for really long time and at that time kept winning with pretty much anyone else... including upset over Vitali)
3) Peter (in retrospect, somewhat underestimated as Peter went downslide quickly, but at that time considered to be a hot prospect - and it had some action, with Wlad winning possibly every round... when he was not down)
4) Pulev - still top10 opponent, and Wlad quickly dominated and finished him
5) tough one to choose.. I would go with Ibragimov - not much excitement, but still 12 rounds of technical boxing and domination over one of the best opponents available.

The Pulev fight was his best effort by far...

He finally displayed some attitude in a big way and made no bones about it... He hated Pulev and put everything into knocking him dead... He had a ton of experience and was 38 years old -- right on the very edge of losing some of his physicality -- but he was still hanging on to it for the last time with a lot of craft and guile behind it... He had enough experience to know the right hand wasn't going to work as well as the left hook for Pulev... Just like the Ray Austin fight.. The left hook was the way to murder this guy.. Even three years previous I don't think he Wladimir could have done the same job on Pulev..

It was like Joshua taking down Dillian Whyte or Froch leveling Groves... If you hate somebody enough it adds to the force of the KO punch... Guy's never been knocked out or even knocked down -- but you stretch him out almost like he could be laid in a casket.

the fight that i liked most was pulev.
i felt wlad had to overcome adversity
and managed to keep his composure.
this one fight he was really a champ
for me.

was it his best win in terms of best
opponent. no, that was clearly povetkin.

Everyone thinks Joshua KO'ing Wlad is a lock, but I see it as a very even fight. If we see the Wlad of old he very well could win. Joshua has questions about both his chin and stamina. Not that they are bad, but just untested at the elite level. Joshua could be Wlad's best win.

Povetkin since he's still a top heavyweight. When Klitschko lost, I think several had Povetkin as the #1 heavyweight in the world too. Pulev was probably his best performance recently, though. Both dudes are still top heavyweights too.

Would beating Joshua make it Klitschko's best win?