Like it or not Sven Ottke is great!!

My Father told me years ago it doesn't matter how you win as long as you win???...Always remembered that.... generally every time I bemoaned my luck!!!!....

Which brings us to Ottke how ever you dissect it we have a guy who retired undefeated..fought in over 20 world title fight, beat some quality names in Brewer twice, Johnson, Reid etc.....Had eight years longevity and got out on top!!!!

Hey I've seen the Red Sox win games they didn't deserve but hey they got the win....

Fact is in sport winning is everything and this guy won and had an exemplary record.....encompassing almost everything needed to be an alltimer.....

Will history remember just his achievements or how he achieved them...remains to be seen..

But....He achieved them..and that's the BOTTOM LINE!!!!!

Poor article. Protected stay-at-home fighter, didn't face the best out there. Course it matters how one achieves their goals. If they're reached through the use of unfair or nefarious means then the significance is greatly diminished. D.

BALTIMORA wrote:Poor article. Protected stay-at-home fighter, didn't face the best out there. Course it matters how one achieves their goals. If they're reached through the use of unfair or nefarious means then the significance is greatly diminished. D.

This

Don't comment on my stuff any more Balti....please!

Why, because I've pointed out the glacier-sized gap in your argument?

I'm just asking you to stop posting your vile on everything I do...

Just don't post please!

Teddy. Pram.

No more..

Look the premise of the article is that if someone achieves over a long period of time he needs to be recognised for it..

Truss thats like saying its OK to use PEDs as long as you don't get caught. History books will show what you achieved but not how you achieved it. I know you like to play devil's advocate so don't believe that you believe what you're saying.

paperbag_puncher wrote:Truss thats like saying its OK to use PEDs as long as you don't get caught. History books will show what you achieved but not how you achieved it. I know you like to play devil's advocate so don't believe that you believe what you're saying.

Exactly that.

What a stupid comparison..

People use Norton twice on Ali's record as part of his legacy...Norton was ripped off..

It's not always how you win as long as you do in the rules..

peds are illegal

Ali has more than Norton on his CV. Ali fought away from home. Ali fought the best available. Ali didn't have Roger Tillemann reffing.

Fellas,

Controversial articles will often rouse the emotions and spawn spirited debate, but let's please treat each other with respect and dignity. Kick lumps out of each other's opinions all you like, but leave the personal stuff out. It's wearing, and it's unnecessary.

Thank you.

Its not that stupid a comparison. There are some fights where Ottke clearly didn't deserve the nod. The means can't justify the end in this case. Unless you can justify corrupt judging?

There are some fights where Ali, Louis etc didn't deserve the nod but to put them in the same camp as drug cheats..Is beyond belief...

When you start being less vindictive and grow up a bit Balti I will return your posts..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:There are some fights where Ali, Louis etc didn't deserve the nod but to put them in the same camp as drug cheats..Is beyond belief...

When you start being less vindictive and grow up a bit Balti I will return your posts..

I'm not losing sleep over it. Hypocritical of you to make a very simplistic and hugely flawed argument and then spit your dummy out when you receive (justifiable) criticism. So now you're comparing two of the best heavies of all time to a German who wouldn't leave Germany and had the benefit of a ref who penalised opponents for landing punches...

I asked, politely, that you refrain from the nasty stuff.

Now I'm telling you that I'm not wasting my day chasing this thread down because you won't play ball.

Shred each other's arguments all you will, but cut the bickering.

Ok. Finished here for now.

Thank you.

Not flawed at all......The guy had a great record retgardless of how it was achieved..

He'll be remembered because of his record but, as Balti pointed out, the way he achieved it will be unearthed by anybody who digs. However, an awful lot will just judge him on his record. So, who know's how history will view him.

But I don't think he will be thought of as a great. We still debate Marciano, Lewis and Tyson's places in history because of the relative weakness of their opponents. Ottke carries that baggage and a decent number of dubious wins.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:My Father told me years ago it doesn't matter how you win as long as you win?

The problem i have is he didn't win a lot of those fights, he's the most protected fighter i can think of.

Not suggesting he won't be remembered in some way for his performances..

7 years unbeaten at the top....22 title fights.....

Results orientated business....

I thought mosley lost twice to Oscar..but hey it still loks great on his record..

It's tough I can see your point..but the peds thing leave it out.

Absolutely agree he was protected....

But don't historians have to look at records and achievements when deciding on legacy!!!

Holmes lost to witherspoon for me and carl williams..but who cares..

I see where you are coming from but It's like Utd winning the league when they get all the penalties and the referees helping them..

They've still won it..

That's true, i'm hoping historians use a bit common sense when rating him, the record books will show him as a good fighter down the years, but we all know he was a fraud.

I don't mind people having an opposing view but some just come on to chuck bile.....which is pretty sad.

Your opinion is welcome....

However achievements do tend to rule the day with most historians..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I don't mind people having an opposing view but some just come on to chuck bile.....which is pretty sad.

Your opinion is welcome....

However achievements do tend to rule the day with most historians..

Any decent historian will take the evidence and assess it in the relevant context. That's the whole point of being a historian. Saul Alvarez and JCC Jr have both had more fights than Ottke, and both are unbeaten. Both have won world title. If they retired tomorrow they wouldn't be seen as 'greats'. Nor should Ottke. Also, the back-pedalling undermines your original argument.

He's been retired long enough to be rated now and he has been forgotten about, a few years down the line he may be talked about but for me that's only because his actions have been forgotten about, if he had fought even just once outside Germany with a neutral referee i would have a lot more respect for him. The Reid fight showed his level for me which was far from world class. I hope the first line wasn't meant for me as you know hardly anybody is going to agree with you on this.

8 years longevity.....22 title fights and some good names make a good case Galvy......

We all know he got some gifts but will it matter..

Cheers..

Eight years of fighting in Germany. 22 title fights without facing the best opponents out there. Calzaghe is criticised for both of these traits, yet his record is leaps ahead of Ottke's. Ottke is not a great.

I think it does Truss, although maybe not fifty years down the line. I honestly believe there was at least a dozen of those title fights he didn't win or wouldn't have won given the circumstances. Darius Michalczewski is also a forgotten man, not a great fighter but a step or two above Ottke for me.

Ottke is arguably a top 10/20 all time amateur - in fact his amateur record is pretty stellar.

As a pro he didn't cut it for me. Too many gifts - that have soured in the minds of fans. Some of those "close" fights - there's a case for him winning. But some of the robberies were so bad that his entire career has been written off.

He's an all time top 10/15 at SMW. But it is quite a young division.

He should be criticised; and rightly so; for failing to fight Calzaghe. Calzaghe wanted the fight and Ottke was relatively clear that he didn't want any of it.

For me, in all-weight terms, he's not an ATG. In SMW terms, he is.

One of Germany's best fighters.

I agree he had the hometown stuff......more than most Galvy..

But we'll see what happens on paper he is great...

Interesting Oxy....

Maybe one of the great 168ers may even warrant a place...

For those who read his record he's great..those who remember some fights he's not..

interesting who wins....

The point is Truss, which I suspect you already know statistics are nothing without context and any kind of analysis of Ottke's career throws up enough asterixes against his work to suggest without an exactly forensic analysis that he is not perhaps as great as his figures suggest. Worth remembering, if it not currently the case it was certainly the case for some time that in bare numerical records Brian Neilsen had a better record at heavy than Ali, which obviously shows the need to dig a little deeper.

Think it demonstrates everything you need to know about Ottke that he is up for the Hall of Fame this year and given he is an undefeated world champion with an 8 year reign his inclusion is far from a formality.

rowley wrote:The point is Truss, which I suspect you already know statistics are nothing without context and any kind of analysis of Ottke's career throws up enough asterixes against his work to suggest without an exactly forensic analysis that he is not perhaps as great as his figures suggest. Worth remembering, if it not currently the case it was certainly the case for some time that in bare numerical records Brian Neilsen had a better record at heavy than Ali, which obviously shows the need to dig a little deeper.

Think it demonstrates everything you need to know about Ottke that he is up for the Hall of Fame this year and given he is an undefeated world champion with an 8 year reign his inclusion is far from a formality.

Lets look at things another way -

Hatton is up in 3 years time. If they were up against each other - Hatton or Ottke?

8 year undefeated champion - or Hatton?

oxring wrote:

rowley wrote:The point is Truss, which I suspect you already know statistics are nothing without context and any kind of analysis of Ottke's career throws up enough asterixes against his work to suggest without an exactly forensic analysis that he is not perhaps as great as his figures suggest. Worth remembering, if it not currently the case it was certainly the case for some time that in bare numerical records Brian Neilsen had a better record at heavy than Ali, which obviously shows the need to dig a little deeper.

Think it demonstrates everything you need to know about Ottke that he is up for the Hall of Fame this year and given he is an undefeated world champion with an 8 year reign his inclusion is far from a formality.

Lets look at things another way -

Hatton is up in 3 years time. If they were up against each other - Hatton or Ottke?

8 year undefeated champion - or Hatton?

Two-weight world champion, 'the man' at 140, fought away from home, revived interest in boxing among casual fans, and Tszyu, Castillo, Collazo, Urango, Malignaggi beat Ottke's top five. Yes, he's not unbeaten but he fought the best available-the VERY best available.

Well - he's a 2-weight champ because he jobbed Collazo away.

Tszyu beats anything that Ottke has - but to look at it another way - he should have been DQd.

Castillo was weak at 140 but Urango and Malignaggi were both good wins. And I agree - Urango and Malignaggi are probably better than any of Ottke's wins.

Ottke is therefore competing with body of work - against Hatton's smaller body of work - but higher quality work.

Overall - there's an argument to say they're comparable.

In eight years and 22 title fights Ottke should have wins to beat overall the five opponents of Hatton which I named. I'm not saying Hatton should be a dead very, just making the case that there's plenty to take into consideration when his name crops up with regards HoF induction.

I'll admit i'll be gutted if Ottke makes the hall of fame, i couldn't respect it anymore.

We are approaching a full moon so that might explain some things..............

Anyway on the boxing front Roger Tilleman's refereeing in the Robin Reid fight really soured peoples opinion of Ottke in this part of the world. A bit like that Maradona handball that perpetuates long after the date it should have been forgotten.

Strongback wrote:We are approaching a full moon so that might explain some things..............

Anyway on the boxing front Roger Tilleman's refereeing in the Robin Reid fight really soured peoples opinion of Ottke in this part of the world. A bit like that Maradona handball that perpetuates long after the date it should have been forgotten.

It's easy to draw inference that if one of his fights in Germany can be so poorly-handled, so too might others have been.

I followed Ottke for a lot of his career and the Reid fight was just one of many for me.

The Galveston Giant wrote:I followed Ottke for a lot of his career and the Reid fight was just one of many for me.

I wouldn't disagree but I reckon when you say Ottke most people think of the Reid debacle.

Strongback wrote:

The Galveston Giant wrote:I followed Ottke for a lot of his career and the Reid fight was just one of many for me.

I wouldn't disagree but I reckon when you say Ottke most people think of the Reid debacle.

True, i certainly didn't see worse officiating than in the Ried fight. Germany is coming on a bit now and fights are shown live around the world regularly now, before that though it's scary to think what went on there. There's hometown decisions everywhere but it seemed it was more than just the judges involved at times.

Most people here think of the Reid debacle.....But a lot of historians American and elsewhere will see the record...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Most people here think of the Reid debacle.....But a lot of historians American and elsewhere will see the record...

...and not analyse it?

Go away.....

Guys... Walcott got screwed against Lewis...Young and Norton twice got screwed against Ali... and Sharkey got screwed against Jeffries ....

No one cares......all about the record and not how it was achieved after the smoke clears...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Guys... Walcott got screwed against Lewis...Young and Norton twice got screwed against Ali... and Sharkey got screwed against Jeffries ....

No one cares......all about the record and not how it was achieved after the smoke clears...

Absolutely not true. There will always be people like Ottke who have an asterisk next to their achievements. What you're saying is basically that someone can cheat and that act will be forgotten.

In the same way that Tyrone Brunson's record for KOs is dismissed because of the nature of his opponents, so too should Ottke's record be scrutinised ruthlessly.

Telling people to go away merely serves to underline your lack of conviction in your own argument.