BoxRec

With 2-3 more solid wins he will be top 15. Not sure he has the signature wins to ever put him in the top 10 but I do think he would beat some top guys for sure.

birdman77 wrote:Based on the @$$ beatings he suffered at hands of 3 borderline contenders is never gonna get him any higher than 20 for me.

You obviously aren't qualified to evaluate when a fighter's prime is vs his pre-prime. Also, everything you said, but Sugar Ray Robinson instead of Wladimir Klitschko, and multiplied by 7. SRR has 19 defeats, some to very mediocre fighters, and who can say which of them did or didn't occur during his prime? Nobody around here seems to be capable of determining when a fighter's prime begins and ends, after all.

GilFilmore wrote:I rank Wladimir higher than Lennox Lewis

And rightfully so.

For example, Wlad has beaten FAR more undefeated fighters (Pulev being the most recent). Wlad has stopped something like 20 boxers who were never stopped before (Pulev being the most recent) Lennox stopped only 2 who were never stopped before. Lennox did a lot of cherry-picking, a shot Tyson being a perfect example.

While some people will always be sickeningly biased against Wlad, thankfully most can see past the prejudice and give him fair credit.

Freedom2013 wrote:

GilFilmore wrote:I rank Wladimir higher than Lennox Lewis

And rightfully so.

For example, Wlad has beaten FAR more undefeated fighters (Pulev being the most recent). Wlad has stopped something like 20 boxers who were never stopped before (Pulev being the most recent) Lennox stopped only 2 who were never stopped before. Lennox did a lot of cherry-picking, a shot Tyson being a perfect example.

While some people will always be sickeningly biased against Wlad, thankfully most can see past the prejudice and give him fair credit.

I don't think that's right. The Klitchkos feasted on the faded versions of any number of former contenders well beaten in the end by Lewis, such as Botha, Rahman, etc. They never had to meet a lively version of Holyfield or Mercer, Ruddock, Bruno even. Decent opponents who came to win.

Putting Wlad above Lewis involves a critical level of retardation. I don't think I could produce a case for it even if I was trolling.

Not trying to necessarily end this argument....BUT we are talking about a guy who stated recently that he will fight ANOTHER 10 YEARS. So even if he doesnt fight that long....he has a long way to go to cement his legacy......a lot of the fighters from the 90s mentioned will have careers that will look relatively short when he is done.....so we wait and see....

Lewis was knocked out by Rahman and Oliver McCall....neither are exactly HOFers

Riddick Blowe wrote:Putting Wlad above Lewis involves a critical level of retardation. I don't think I could produce a case for it even if I was trolling.

That's a bit harsh isn't it?
All-Time rankings are quite a bit subjective, aren't they?

dempseyfire wrote:The current scene is now full of so many kids who know so little about boxing history, this whole thread is just troll bait from not white supremacist "Freedom" aka Tunney.

Klitschko is outside the top 20. The value of the number of title defenses drastically decreases in the era of numerous paper belts along with reigning when the talent depth of boxing in the upper weight classes has truly gone to crap, although I give Wlad credit for consistency; a trait historically rare in the HW division.

Kindly post your top 20. Wlad is likely top 8-14 right now, and his career isn't over.

Scizzle123 wrote:Lewis was knocked out by Rahman and Oliver McCall....neither are exactly HOFers

They're still better than the guys Wlad lost to.

Plus Lewis was down oh, maybe 10 times less than Wlad in his career and if you put their best wins side by side, Lewis's 7th or 8th best win would be equal to Wlad's best. As well as Lewis being more skilled, less robotic, tougher, and more adaptable.

You know. Troll better.

cjdragon wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:Putting Wlad above Lewis involves a critical level of retardation. I don't think I could produce a case for it even if I was trolling.

That's a bit harsh isn't it?
All-Time rankings are quite a bit subjective, aren't they?

Using what criteria could you legitimately place Wlad above Lewis in a top heavyweight list?

Freedom2013 wrote:

GilFilmore wrote:I rank Wladimir higher than Lennox Lewis

And rightfully so.

For example, Wlad has beaten FAR more undefeated fighters (Pulev being the most recent). Wlad has stopped something like 20 boxers who were never stopped before (Pulev being the most recent) Lennox stopped only 2 who were never stopped before. Lennox did a lot of cherry-picking, a shot Tyson being a perfect example.

While some people will always be sickeningly biased against Wlad, thankfully most can see past the prejudice and give him fair credit.

Congratulations!!!! You have just made one of the dumbest posts of the day.

SNG wrote:Using what criteria could you legitimately place Wlad above Lewis in a top heavyweight list?

Maybe they think Wlad wins H2H. Maybe they dismiss Wlad's losses because they think they were before his prime and count Lewis's because they think they were in his prime.

I've got Lewis ahead, but having Wladimir ahead is not absurd.

Horse wrote:

SNG wrote:Using what criteria could you legitimately place Wlad above Lewis in a top heavyweight list?

Maybe they think Wlad wins H2H. Maybe they dismiss Wlad's losses because they think they were before his prime and count Lewis's because they think they were in his prime.

I've got Lewis ahead, but having Wladimir ahead is not absurd.

I don't agree with using head to head personally, far too subjective. Personally I think Lewis has a better resume and I don't think it's that close, he fought and beat better men in a better era and his losses come against better fighters than Wlad's, which he avenged anyway. Has Wlad ever avenged a loss? I can't recall him doing off the top of my head. I think Wlad is an very good fighter, and if I was to pick head to head I think he'd beat some of the much smaller men I rank higher than him but his resume simply isn't that good in comparison. Maybe it's similar to Holmes' reign, and he'll be looked back upon far more favourably.

SNG wrote:

cjdragon wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:Putting Wlad above Lewis involves a critical level of retardation. I don't think I could produce a case for it even if I was trolling.

That's a bit harsh isn't it?
All-Time rankings are quite a bit subjective, aren't they?

Using what criteria could you legitimately place Wlad above Lewis in a top heavyweight list?

I do not rank Wlad above Lewis. I wouldn't even attempt to do that before Wlad retires.
I just thought the criticism of those who do rank Wlad high was too harsh.

SNG wrote:

Horse wrote:

SNG wrote:Using what criteria could you legitimately place Wlad above Lewis in a top heavyweight list?

Maybe they think Wlad wins H2H. Maybe they dismiss Wlad's losses because they think they were before his prime and count Lewis's because they think they were in his prime.

I've got Lewis ahead, but having Wladimir ahead is not absurd.

I don't agree with using head to head personally, far too subjective. Personally I think Lewis has a better resume and I don't think it's that close, he fought and beat better men in a better era and his losses come against better fighters than Wlad's, which he avenged anyway. Has Wlad ever avenged a loss? I can't recall him doing off the top of my head. I think Wlad is an very good fighter, and if I was to pick head to head I think he'd beat some of the much smaller men I rank higher than him but his resume simply isn't that good in comparison. Maybe it's similar to Holmes' reign, and he'll be looked back upon far more favourably.

Yes Wlad avenged one of his losses (Brewster).

Fair enough, I don't remember the second Brewster fight at all.

SNG wrote:I don't agree with using head to head personally, far too subjective. Personally I think Lewis has a better resume and I don't think it's that close, he fought and beat better men in a better era and his losses come against better fighters than Wlad's, which he avenged anyway. Has Wlad ever avenged a loss? I can't recall him doing off the top of my head. I think Wlad is an very good fighter, and if I was to pick head to head I think he'd beat some of the much smaller men I rank higher than him but his resume simply isn't that good in comparison. Maybe it's similar to Holmes' reign, and he'll be looked back upon far more favourably.

He avenged the Brewster loss, but didn't avenge the Saunders or Puritty losses.

Why didn't Wladimir and Lennox fight anyway? They were both champs at the same time for a couple of years.

Horse wrote:

SNG wrote:I don't agree with using head to head personally, far too subjective. Personally I think Lewis has a better resume and I don't think it's that close, he fought and beat better men in a better era and his losses come against better fighters than Wlad's, which he avenged anyway. Has Wlad ever avenged a loss? I can't recall him doing off the top of my head. I think Wlad is an very good fighter, and if I was to pick head to head I think he'd beat some of the much smaller men I rank higher than him but his resume simply isn't that good in comparison. Maybe it's similar to Holmes' reign, and he'll be looked back upon far more favourably.

He avenged the Brewster loss, but didn't avenge the Saunders or Puritty losses.

Why didn't Wladimir and Lennox fight anyway? They were both champs at the same time for a couple of years.

They did, never see Oceans 11?

Lewis never seemed interested in the WBO, good question though, but it wouldn't mean much now would it? Wlad wasn't half the fighter that he is now.

SNG wrote:Fair enough, I don't remember the second Brewster fight at all.

It wasn't very memorable aside from the "revenge" factor :)
Wlad gave him a one-sided beating for 6 rounds.

SNG wrote:They did, never see Oceans 11?

Lewis never seemed interested in the WBO, good question though, but it wouldn't mean much now would it? Wlad wasn't half the fighter that he is now.

The win would still look good on Lewis's record, or fantastic on Wlad's.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Scizzle123 wrote:Lewis was knocked out by Rahman and Oliver McCall....neither are exactly HOFers

They're still better than the guys Wlad lost to.

Plus Lewis was down oh, maybe 10 times less than Wlad in his career and if you put their best wins side by side, Lewis's 7th or 8th best win would be equal to Wlad's best. As well as Lewis being more skilled, less robotic, tougher, and more adaptable.

You know. Troll better.

so a washed up Tyson and a blown up aging Light heavy in Holyfield are his best wins....these are his best wins....Wlad would have killed Tyson the same.....and Lewis won by the skin of his teeth against Holyfield...also lewis was Knocked out cold...not moving...we havent seen that with Wlad....any heavyweight with punching power can knock another man down

Scizzle123 wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Scizzle123 wrote:Lewis was knocked out by Rahman and Oliver McCall....neither are exactly HOFers

They're still better than the guys Wlad lost to.

Plus Lewis was down oh, maybe 10 times less than Wlad in his career and if you put their best wins side by side, Lewis's 7th or 8th best win would be equal to Wlad's best. As well as Lewis being more skilled, less robotic, tougher, and more adaptable.

You know. Troll better.

so a washed up Tyson and a blown up aging Light heavy in Holyfield are his best wins....these are his best wins....Wlad would have killed Tyson the same.....and Lewis won by the skin of his teeth against Holyfield...also lewis was Knocked out cold...not moving...we havent seen that with Wlad....any heavyweight with punching power can knock another man down......against Sanders (who could punch llike a mofo) the 3 knock down rule was in effect....in the other fights he just tired

Ricky_ wrote:

tiny_acres wrote:

Ricky_ wrote:He's not even the best Klitchko.

I used to think the same thing.But I am now convinced that Wlad is the better of the brothers.

Wlad is now more polished technically, but Vitali would hand him his ass.

Wlad has had a better career, but Vitali would beat him up if they fought. Wlad could outbox him in spots, but he couldn't control range like he usually does against a bigger, stronger man with better stamina who could rely on his chin holding up. Vitali would overwhelm Wlad with physical strength and volume punching and certainly had enough power to hurt him.

chucktaylor wrote:
Wlad has had a better career, but Vitali would beat him up if they fought. Wlad could outbox him in spots, but he couldn't control range like he usually does against a bigger, stronger man with better stamina who could rely on his chin holding up. Vitali would overwhelm Wlad with physical strength and volume punching and certainly had enough power to hurt him.

I think Wlad would beat Vitali H2H. I think Vitali is overrated in H2H considerations.

If he was so good then why was his opposition so underwhelming? I'll always give the benefit of the doubt to the fighter who beat the better opposition.