BoxRec

It was not about Wlad being old. Wladimir looked crap even against Povetkin .

He faced only small inside fighters who walked into his punches like robots.

His winning was mostly based on clinching.

His jab n grab style worked pretty well against those small guys.

He did looked bad against Jennings not because of his age.

Jennings was his most completed opponent after David Haye.

Jenning's movement and defence gave him problems.

Guys like Povetkin or Pulev are easy fights even for average tall outside fighter with a decent speed.

Klitschko got rocked even by this bum Wach who is not even average.

His grab n jab style did not work at all against Fury and he was hopeless omg.

Im not his hater but Wladimir would get murdered even by fat 2003 Lewis.

Tyson Fury exposed him. Wladimir is not good as many of you think.

He dominated very weak era.

Valuev almost lost against old Evander.

Takam needed 8 rounds against old Michael Grant.

Tua as an old man was never knocked out.

conty22 wrote:It was not about Wlad being old. Wladimir looked crap even against Povetkin .

He faced only small inside fighters who walked into his punches like robots.

His winning was mostly based on clinching.

His jab n grab style worked pretty well against those small guys.

He did looked bad against Jennings not because of his age.

Jennings was his most completed opponent after David Haye.

Jenning's movement and defence gave him problems.

Guys like Povetkin or Pulev are easy fights even for average tall outside fighter with a decent speed.

Klitschko got rocked even by this bum Wach who is not even average.

His grab n jab style did not work at all against Fury and he was hopeless omg.

Im not his hater but Wladimir would get murdered even by fat 2003 Lewis.

Tyson Fury exposed him. Wladimir is not good as many of you think.

He dominated very weak era.

Valuev almost lost against old Evander.

Takam needed 8 rounds against old Michael Grant.

Tua as an old man was never knocked out.

The Brothers K dominated their era. End of discussion. Nobody can stop the aging process or beat the clock, not even Bernard Hopkins.

Klitschko looked great against Pulev, but completely flat against Jennings. Maybe he had an off night against Fury, maybe his motivation has gone after becoming a dad and wife having depression or maybe he's done. The rematch against Fury (if it happens) will confirm that.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but to dismiss him as a bum is totally idiotic.

Regardless what you think of their styles and era, they dominated the division in the same fashion as Lewis and Holmes. History will reflect that.

Making an assumption, Joshua excluded (question marks still exist for me about him) - the HW Div will be wide open for a while, which I think is a good thing.

he was exposed long before Fury

Riddick Blowe wrote:he was exposed long before Fury

This.

Loki wrote:

conty22 wrote:It was not about Wlad being old. Wladimir looked crap even against Povetkin .

He faced only small inside fighters who walked into his punches like robots.

His winning was mostly based on clinching.

His jab n grab style worked pretty well against those small guys.

He did looked bad against Jennings not because of his age.

Jennings was his most completed opponent after David Haye.

Jenning's movement and defence gave him problems.

Guys like Povetkin or Pulev are easy fights even for average tall outside fighter with a decent speed.

Klitschko got rocked even by this bum Wach who is not even average.

His grab n jab style did not work at all against Fury and he was hopeless omg.

Im not his hater but Wladimir would get murdered even by fat 2003 Lewis.

Tyson Fury exposed him. Wladimir is not good as many of you think.

He dominated very weak era.

Valuev almost lost against old Evander.

Takam needed 8 rounds against old Michael Grant.

Tua as an old man was never knocked out.

The Brothers K dominated their era. End of discussion. Nobody can stop the aging process or beat the clock, not even Bernard Hopkins.

Klitschko looked great against Pulev, but completely flat against Jennings. Maybe he had an off night against Fury, maybe his motivation has gone after becoming a dad and wife having depression or maybe he's done. The rematch against Fury (if it happens) will confirm that.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but to dismiss him as a bum is totally idiotic.

Regardless what you think of their styles and era, they dominated the division in the same fashion as Lewis and Holmes. History will reflect that.

Making an assumption, Joshua excluded (question marks still exist for me about him) - the HW Div will be wide open for a while, which I think is a good thing.

Yes, the Klitschkos dominated their era - Wlad in particular, but most realise that his domination was of one of the weakest eras in heavyweight boxing for a very long time. Had Wlad fought in the same era as Lewis or Holmes, he would not have been a dominant champion. I agree that any version of Tyson Fury gives Wlad problems. None of this makes him a bum, but he was certainly never as good as some here were making him out to be.

No.

Wladimir is a good fighter, but Fury is better.

The early aggressive version of Wlad (before his ko losses) might well have walked through Fury.

I don't care for the term exposed. Not the way it's thrown around anyhow. I mean, every fighter has a certain area where they can be exposed.

With Wlad, I wanted to see how he would finally do against someone who was taller and longer than him, with movement and a good jab. And we got the answer. Wlad still dominated an era. But, I feel Fury would have beaten any version of Wlad.

Was Wladimir exposed by Tyson Fury?
Was Roy Jones Jr. exposed by Antonio Tarver?
Was Bernard Hopkins exposed by Sergei Kovalev?
Was Oscar De La Hoya exposed by Manny Pacquiao?
Was Mike Tyson exposed by Danny Williams?
Was Muhammad Ali exposed by Leon Spinks?
Was Larry Holmes exposed by Brian Nielsen?
Was Roberto Duran exposed by Hector Camacho?
Was Evander Holyfield exposed by Sultan Ibragimov?
Was Sugar Ray Robinson exposed by Joey Archer?
Was George Foreman exposed by Shannon Briggs?

If you're asking any of these questions seriously, or answering yes to any of them, you're an imbecile. You don't understand what exposure is, and you don't understand what a prime is.

Lackeos wrote:Was Wladimir exposed by Tyson Fury?
Was Roy Jones Jr. exposed by Antonio Tarver?
Was Bernard Hopkins exposed by Sergei Kovalev?
Was Oscar De La Hoya exposed by Manny Pacquiao?
Was Mike Tyson exposed by Danny Williams?
Was Muhammad Ali exposed by Leon Spinks?
Was Larry Holmes exposed by Brian Nielsen?
Was Roberto Duran exposed by Hector Camacho?
Was Evander Holyfield exposed by Sultan Ibragimov?
Was Sugar Ray Robinson exposed by Joey Archer?
Was George Foreman exposed by Shannon Briggs?

If you're asking any of these questions seriously, or answering yes to any of them, you're an imbecile. You don't understand what exposure is, and you don't understand what a prime is.

And you don't understand that you just reeled off a list of great fighters, while we're talking about Wlad Klitschko

Sick of hearing about what a fraud Wlad is and how he's been "exposed".. give the guy a break.

He's a good boxer who's dominated his era against very poor opposition. He's getting older and been beat by a young hungry enthusiastic boxer. He hasn't been exposed as what was their to expose? Everyone knows his limitations. At sometime or other he was going to get beat, just like many long reigning champions..how many have reigned as champion as long as him and retired undefeated?..not many.

Whilst I didn't enjoy watching him fight and would certainly not rate him as an ATG, his accomplishments should be recognised for what they are..a long reign as world champ during an an awful era of heavyweight boxing.

I think a number of factors were at play here.

I think Fury was the first guy with the size, reach and tactics to carry out a gameplan which nullified Wlad's strength's but I also think that Wlad's reflexes have slipped at 39, and he couldn't pull the trigger quick enough to zero in on an elusive Fury.

I expect Fury to win the rematch, possibly by late stoppage or with Wlad being pulled out or quitting on his stool, and for Wlad to retire promptly afterward.

Boxerbeetle wrote:The early aggressive version of Wlad (before his ko losses) might well have walked through Fury.

Yes, quite possibly. Fury doesn't really have a huge amount of firepower, he's certainly not got the offensive capability of Sanders.

Boxerbeetle wrote:The early aggressive version of Wlad (before his ko losses) might well have walked through Fury.

Definitely. The early version of Wlad would have had a far better chance against some of the better fighters in history than the later one. Yet people still think the latter-day version was 'improved'. Oh well.

Wladimir didn't fight. Tyson Fury exposed the fact that he can beat a Wladimir that doesn't fight. That's about it.

The Revival wrote:Wladimir didn't fight. Tyson Fury exposed the fact that he can beat a Wladimir that doesn't fight. That's about it.

He wasn't allowed to fight, Fury kept on moving and (very occasionally) potshotting.

Wlad couldn't get his shots off because he had a constantly moving target.

If Fury had stood straight in front of him, Wlad would have done the same as he did to everybody else he fought over the last 10 years, and jabbed his head off until there was no resistance left. Or if Fury had tried to come rushing in, he'd have blasted him with a left hook or massive straight right.

The idea that Fury won because Wlad just plain refused to fight, is pretty dumb.

I don't really rate Fury much, I doubt he will be a dominant champ, but he fought the perfect tactics that night.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I don't really rate Fury much, I doubt he will be a dominant champ, but he fought the perfect tactics that night.

Do you rate any heavyweight?

Lackeos wrote:Was Wladimir exposed by Tyson Fury?
Was Roy Jones Jr. exposed by Antonio Tarver?
Was Bernard Hopkins exposed by Sergei Kovalev?
Was Oscar De La Hoya exposed by Manny Pacquiao?
Was Mike Tyson exposed by Danny Williams?
Was Muhammad Ali exposed by Leon Spinks?
Was Larry Holmes exposed by Brian Nielsen?
Was Roberto Duran exposed by Hector Camacho?
Was Evander Holyfield exposed by Sultan Ibragimov?
Was Sugar Ray Robinson exposed by Joey Archer?
Was George Foreman exposed by Shannon Briggs?

If you're asking any of these questions seriously, or answering yes to any of them, you're an imbecile. You don't understand what exposure is, and you don't understand what a prime is.

Answers like this is exactly why you are one of my favorite posters.
Wlad is past his prime. I personally found him to be the most boring heavyweight champion ever.
Boring but successful.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

The Revival wrote:Wladimir didn't fight. Tyson Fury exposed the fact that he can beat a Wladimir that doesn't fight. That's about it.

He wasn't allowed to fight, Fury kept on moving and (very occasionally) potshotting.

Wlad couldn't get his shots off because he had a constantly moving target.

If Fury had stood straight in front of him, Wlad would have done the same as he did to everybody else he fought over the last 10 years, and jabbed his head off until there was no resistance left. Or if Fury had tried to come rushing in, he'd have blasted him with a left hook or massive straight right.

The idea that Fury won because Wlad just plain refused to fight, is pretty dumb.

I don't really rate Fury much, I doubt he will be a dominant champ, but he fought the perfect tactics that night.

I know Fury moved a lot, and I know he didn't give Wladimir a still target, but that doesn't change the fact that Wlad didn't even throw punches during most of the damn fight.

Look at moments when Fury was up against the ropes...standing still. Left arm outstretched hanging on the top rope...WIDE OPEN, and Wlad just stands there looking at him. You think Wlad couldn't have hit him right then? Of course he could've. He didn't even try.

It was one of the most laughably pathetic Championship Boxing matches I've ever seen. No winner. 2 losers.

The Revival wrote:It was one of the most laughably pathetic Championship Boxing matches I've ever seen. No winner. 2 losers.

Except for Fury, who won.

Horse wrote:

The Revival wrote:It was one of the most laughably pathetic Championship Boxing matches I've ever seen. No winner. 2 losers.

Except for Fury, who won.

He won the fight and the Championship. Nobody can deny that, and I'm not saying he didn't deserve the decision. I'm saying it was a suck ass fight that lowered my opinion of both fighters.

Totally disagree of current Fury beats any version of Klitschko. He's 39 FFS. That speaks volumes.

Loki wrote:Totally disagree of current Fury beats any version of Klitschko. He's 39 FFS. That speaks volumes.

Any version of Wladimir that shows up and fights beats Fury. Including the 39 year old Wladimir.

The Revival wrote:

Horse wrote:

The Revival wrote:It was one of the most laughably pathetic Championship Boxing matches I've ever seen. No winner. 2 losers.

Except for Fury, who won.

He won the fight and the Championship. Nobody can deny that, and I'm not saying he didn't deserve the decision. I'm saying it was a suck ass fight that lowered my opinion of both fighters.

I just don't see how Fury's victory over WKlit could lower anyone's opinion of Tyson. He did what was necessary to defeat the king of the hill, no matter how old and toothless the old lion has become.

I also do not understand how a 40+ year old champion for a decade should be diminished due to a loss to a young behemoth with decent skills.

Tanzio wrote:

The Revival wrote:

Horse wrote:Except for Fury, who won.

He won the fight and the Championship. Nobody can deny that, and I'm not saying he didn't deserve the decision. I'm saying it was a suck ass fight that lowered my opinion of both fighters.

I just don't see how Fury's victory over WKlit could lower anyone's opinion of Tyson. He did what was necessary to defeat the king of the hill, no matter how old and toothless the old lion has become.

I also do not understand how a 40+ year old champion for a decade should be diminished due to a loss to a young behemoth with decent skills.

Because HE DIDN'T FIGHT. That's how. If he would've done his best, and got knocked out I'd respect that. He basically came in there, stood there for 12 rounds, and handed Tyson Fury the Championship. The fact that you guys act like Tyson Fury did something impressive baffles me.