BoxRec

No, Tuan, I was genuinely interested, do you go to many heavyweight title fights? With your knowledge you must have been to more than Colin Hart.

mickey1975 wrote:No, Tuan, I was genuinely interested, do you go to many heavyweight title fights? With your knowledge you must have been to more than Colin Hart.

No I don't go to many heavyweight title fights. Does this exclude me from having an opinion on Klitschko/Fury? Tell me, Mickey, and please be very clear, what added insight do you gain from sitting 30 rows up in a room full of tens of thousands of people screaming?

I'm also genuinely interested whether you think it is possible to have knowledge about an event you haven't personally witnessed?

Tuan_Jim wrote: I'm also genuinely interested whether you think it is possible to have knowledge about an event you haven't personally witnessed?

Am I allowed to have knowledge on George Groves/Dario German Balmaceda, even though I was vomiting on Wembley Way during the main event and saw the fight on television later?

It's a grey area.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote: I'm also genuinely interested whether you think it is possible to have knowledge about an event you haven't personally witnessed?

Am I allowed to have knowledge on George Groves/Dario German Balmaceda, even though I was vomiting on Wembley Way during the main event and saw the fight on television later?

It's a grey area.

mickey1975 wrote:Bunce said Wlad was a top 5 heavyweight of all time on Five Live last night when working Sports Personality.

I can see an argument for top 10 - but top 5!!! No way. Against his longevity, you have his losses and the manner of them, plus the weakness of the division.

I'm not sure though that there are 10 or more heavyweight champions with reigns long enough to warrant being ahead of him.

Most of the heavyweight champs after the top 5 had pretty short reigns.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

mickey1975 wrote:Bunce said Wlad was a top 5 heavyweight of all time on Five Live last night when working Sports Personality.

I can see an argument for top 10 - but top 5!!! No way. Against his longevity, you have his losses and the manner of them, plus the weakness of the division.

I'm not sure though that there are 10 or more heavyweight champions with reigns long enough to warrant being ahead of him.

Most of the heavyweight champs after the top 5 had pretty short reigns.

I don't value his 'reign' very highly.

I probably wouldn't argue too much with a 15-20 ranking.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

mickey1975 wrote:Bunce said Wlad was a top 5 heavyweight of all time on Five Live last night when working Sports Personality.

I can see an argument for top 10 - but top 5!!! No way. Against his longevity, you have his losses and the manner of them, plus the weakness of the division.

I'm not sure though that there are 10 or more heavyweight champions with reigns long enough to warrant being ahead of him.

Most of the heavyweight champs after the top 5 had pretty short reigns.

I don't value his 'reign' very highly.

I probably wouldn't argue too much with a 15-20 ranking.

Are we still waiting for a definitive reply from Mr. M. 1975?

Judging a heavyweight's standing on the length of their reign is a perilous endeavour. Some heavyweights compete in a pool so deep it is impossible to enjoy a long reign. Other heavyweights stand tall in the shallow end for ten years, occasionally requiring their bigger, tougher brother to attend to the scary looking challengers. Few heavyweights in history have enjoyed such a privilege.

Wladimir is without a single great victim, his losses occurred in his prime, to B and C class fighters, and were utterly cataclysmic, without any rematches, and he surrendered his titles in such a meek, unmanly fashion for a supposedly great heavyweight champion it is without parallel in the entire history of gloved boxing.

Whan ranking heavyweights I look at ability and who they beat coupled along with their title reigns. I can't put Wlad top ten, can see the case for top 20 though. His defeats put him behind his brother imo, even though Wlad was technically better.
Wlads best two victories are Haye and Povetkin.

My top ten, in no particular order -
Louis, Ali, Johnson, Holmes, Lewis, Frazier, Marciano, Foreman, Jeffries, Holyfield. It sometimes changes and maybe Tyson creeps in every now and then, but Wlad never has and never will do ( unless he comes back knocks out Fury, smashes Wilder, Ortiz and Joshua, who then himself goes onto have a long reign once Wlad retires )

Bunce was calling him top five because he loves boxing, wanted to boost Furys chances and absolutely sucks up to whoever is in his company.

Why wait for a reply? Bunce said it, not me. Nigel Benn has, too, quoting evolution. Sorry.

mickey1975 wrote:Why wait for a reply? Bunce said it, not me. Nigel Benn has, too, quoting evolution. Sorry.

He's a born again Christian, the irony.

lillywhite14 wrote:My top ten, in no particular order -
Louis, Ali, Johnson, Holmes, Lewis, Frazier, Marciano, Foreman, Jeffries, Holyfield. It sometimes changes and maybe Tyson creeps in every now and then

Throw in Dempsey, Charles & Tunney and you pretty much have the consensus top 15 or so heavyweights. I'd be very interested to hear where exactly Bunce feels Wlad fits in - I agree that he'd be absolutely nowhere near my top 10, let alone top 5.

It all depends on your criteria.

I don't mind someone having a vastly different ranking or opinion as long as their criteria are not ridiculous.

Unless we're discussing boxers spanning millions of years, evolution should not enter the conversation.

lillywhite14 wrote:Whan ranking heavyweights I look at ability and who they beat coupled along with their title reigns. I can't put Wlad top ten, can see the case for top 20 though. His defeats put him behind his brother imo, even though Wlad was technically better.
Wlads best two victories are Haye and Povetkin.

My top ten, in no particular order -
Louis, Ali, Johnson, Holmes, Lewis, Frazier, Marciano, Foreman, Jeffries, Holyfield. It sometimes changes and maybe Tyson creeps in every now and then, but Wlad never has and never will do ( unless he comes back knocks out Fury, smashes Wilder, Ortiz and Joshua, who then himself goes onto have a long reign once Wlad retires )

Bunce was calling him top five because he loves boxing, wanted to boost Furys chances and absolutely sucks up to whoever is in his company.

No Dempsey on that list is crazy. Hang your head I shame Ginola fan.