--- Rating Wladimir Klitchsko ---

First topic message reminder :

My ratings

Technical Ability - 9.5, Like him or not, for a heavyweight He is technically one of the most superior boxers ever, Excellent jab and right hands also has a good left hook. standing at over 6 and a half feet the guy can box great, obviously the smaller the heavyweight is the more skill he has to have but Wlad's techinique with his size means that you wont see him beat anytime soon

Defence - 8, alot of WK success is down to his boxing skills but you can't overlook his size when it comes to defense. Like his brother he uses his size to lean back and get out out punching range, he is light on his feet and that accompanied with his size means he can effortlessly move out of range, when an opponent closes him down although he is very negative and boring, he is very effective with clinching.

Offence -7, in this catagory Wlad can be much better than he is, but for one reason or another (could be low confidence in chin or just poor mentality) he is not that good here and was much better in his younger days. Example of his offence not being great would be in the haye fight - sure the Klit fans would cry that haye was too defencive but if Wlad was a great offencive fighter he would get him out of there, if haye did that vs Louis he would be out inside 5.

Footwork - 9, this in my opinion is a area where his ability is overlooked. He has great physical advantages over his opponents yes, but without excellent footwork and a poor chin people would find him and KO him, he is able to close of a ring when needed and is excellent backing away and getting out of range, Always in balance and always composed because of this .

Accuracy - 8, He has good accuracy but not great. He has very accurate jab and right hand but level of competition has to be looked at, he hasn't really faced an opponent who is exactly hard to hit, when he did in haye WK did not have the same succes he usually has.

Power - 9, He has great power - he has very powerful jab, right hand and left hook, tools that could have made him a very exciting fighter, but lack of aggressive mentality has meant it's rare you see Klitcshko take out an opponent before round 10, overmatched opponents are able to go 10 but that doesn't reflect WK's power, as he only throws few right hands per round and a even rare left hook before 10.

Speed - 7, he has excellent speed for a heavyweight of his size, but this ratings are not done to size its done to division, so although for his size its excellent as a heavyweight overall it doesn't compare that well, but its still very good. He can throw quick jabs and right hands, also good quick left hooks - all with power. But he isn't the fastest and not close.

Versatility - 6, He is able to both Box and if he wanted he would be able to brawl like his early days, but that's not how he fights now, meaning he only boxes and can only box - doesn' have confidence in his chin to trade punches.

Stamina - 7, He is able to go full 12 no problem, but he has no one to push him, he doesn't have a really high work rate so you can't know what's his limit, he in his prime takes very few punches and hasn't been in a fight where he needed to find his second wind - doesn't show how good is stamina is, but rather the lack of solid competition there is, meaning no one to push him out of his comfort zone and over his limit. He did gas against purity

Heart - 7.5, He showed tremendous heart to come back from 3 KO losses and was floored 3 times against peter in the first fight, a fight many said it was not if but a when WK is going to get KO'd. But at his peak he is head and shoulders above his competetion, only his brother stand with him. Yet the man refuses to open up and be aggressive and give the boxing fans excitement, being the Heavyweight Champion of the world, he has the power to make boxing mainstream again, but to do that you need explosive KO's - something WK refuses - not can't- to deliver. E.g. against haye he didn't really let his hands go, sure haye was defensive and fought poorly, but if you're a great with KO power, you should be able to take a guy like Haye out, that fight showed two guys who didn't want to risk going for it, for the fear of getting KO'd.

Chin - 4.5, his chin is bad, just bad, terrible. I don't criticize people's all that often because the often get hit with excellent punches leading people to believe and say that that KO victim has a glass chin, ignoring the Great punch and not giving credit to the fighter delivering the punch. But I can't defend WK, the man has no chin, he gets hit and he panics, he has KO'd 3 times and not by fighter with solid punching power (apart from Saunders). David Haye, a cruiserweight puncher, stunned him with a normal overhand right in the 12th, Wach seemed to stun him also, his excellent defence and poor competition often hides his chin.

Physical Attributes - 10, Do I really need to explain. Many times after the fight I read comments saying Klitchsko was too big, I don't agree with this - he beats his opponents because he is too Skilled, Of course his size has a lot to do with it but it's not the main aspect. WK is excellent and controlling range and fighting to his strengths, his footwork and defensive technique of pulling back means the opponents more often than not fall short of there target. This isn't a rating of size, it's a rating of how the individual uses it, for example Paul Williams would not get that high of a rating although physically he was a freak of nature, he didn't use it - unlike Wladimir

Overall - 8

Some attributes are missing though such as Cut/Swelling resistance and ring IQ etc...

For me he is a top 15 Heavyweight and a Solid HOF fighter.

David Haye is a fan of Otis Redding, I guess I am now also a fan of David Haye. Good choice though. "I've got dreams to remember" is a very accurste description of his ambition regarding the Klitschkos.

monty junior wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:I can see why Vitali might be a few people's favourite over Frazier, but I wouldn't be totally cocksure about it. It's possible that Frazier could "run in to the jab" all night (against either brother), but it's also possible that his head movement and speed coming inside could take their jabs away and allow him to work on the inside. He made Ali miss a hell of a lot in their first fight, for instance. If that's the case against a Klitschko, and he can get in close to their bodies, it would be an interesting fight.

The thing about both of the Klitschkos is that they've almost never really had to take more than one, perhaps two, big shots in succession for the past ten years, in which they've both (particularly Wladimir) hit their peaks. Frazier's speed in close could change all of that and, while Vitali has a very good chin, it's not impossible that Frazier could put a dent in it. In fairness, much of that is down to how good they are, but some of it is also down to the fact that they haven't faced an exceptional pressure fighter between them, too.

Frazier was a slow starter (the first Bonavena fight being a prime example) and was vulnerable early on before his engine warmed up and before he'd found an attacking rhythm, but then again neither Klitschko really sets a red-hot pace early on, so he probably won't have to worry too much about that here.

I'd probably see Frazier-Klitschko (either one) as a pick 'em, more or less. The second Ali fight, in which Frazier was tied up inside and smothered, gives Wladimir a fair bit of hope (he doesn't throw much on the inside, but is very good at taking the sting out of an opponent's attack there) but I do believe there's evidence each way for this one.

Joe would be so physically inferior physically to both brother's he would be knackered from the clinches as he would always be going backwards with 250 pounds weighing on him. Another problem for Frazier would be actually connecting properly with his left hook, especially to the jaw, he had to launch himself to reach Ali who was next 6,3 compared to the Klitschko's being 6,7. I just think it's a terrible matchup for Joe, he could shake up Wlad sure but I think he would be taken out by both.

Tyson Fury dwarfed Steve Cunningham recently but still ended up on his back (and Cunningham is no puncher at heavyweight). Frazier would tag Wladimir and get him out of there. He'd systematically beat Vitali up.

Absolutely................................

hazharrison wrote:

monty junior wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:I can see why Vitali might be a few people's favourite over Frazier, but I wouldn't be totally cocksure about it. It's possible that Frazier could "run in to the jab" all night (against either brother), but it's also possible that his head movement and speed coming inside could take their jabs away and allow him to work on the inside. He made Ali miss a hell of a lot in their first fight, for instance. If that's the case against a Klitschko, and he can get in close to their bodies, it would be an interesting fight.

The thing about both of the Klitschkos is that they've almost never really had to take more than one, perhaps two, big shots in succession for the past ten years, in which they've both (particularly Wladimir) hit their peaks. Frazier's speed in close could change all of that and, while Vitali has a very good chin, it's not impossible that Frazier could put a dent in it. In fairness, much of that is down to how good they are, but some of it is also down to the fact that they haven't faced an exceptional pressure fighter between them, too.

Frazier was a slow starter (the first Bonavena fight being a prime example) and was vulnerable early on before his engine warmed up and before he'd found an attacking rhythm, but then again neither Klitschko really sets a red-hot pace early on, so he probably won't have to worry too much about that here.

I'd probably see Frazier-Klitschko (either one) as a pick 'em, more or less. The second Ali fight, in which Frazier was tied up inside and smothered, gives Wladimir a fair bit of hope (he doesn't throw much on the inside, but is very good at taking the sting out of an opponent's attack there) but I do believe there's evidence each way for this one.

Joe would be so physically inferior physically to both brother's he would be knackered from the clinches as he would always be going backwards with 250 pounds weighing on him. Another problem for Frazier would be actually connecting properly with his left hook, especially to the jaw, he had to launch himself to reach Ali who was next 6,3 compared to the Klitschko's being 6,7. I just think it's a terrible matchup for Joe, he could shake up Wlad sure but I think he would be taken out by both.

Tyson Fury dwarfed Steve Cunningham recently but still ended up on his back (and Cunningham is no puncher at heavyweight). Frazier would tag Wladimir and get him out of there. He'd systematically beat Vitali up.

But Fury won that fight simply because he was taller and weighed more and his weight size advantage won the fight for him. the same outcome would happen if WLad fought Marciano or Frazier.

KO-KING wrote: Wlad Does use head movement, leaning back requires technique, that is also head movement - just backwards. By bending his knees he would give up his height advantage, one of the things Manny Stewart said you should never do, he also said that was one of cotto's main issue's, he gave up any height he had when going to the body

I did concede that the defensive subtleties Wlad employes are flawless. However perfecting a lean back, jab, push off, clinch and a LONG left hook doesn't warrant a 9.5 rating in technical ability because evidently he falls short in many aspects.

RE: maintaining height/not bending at the knees.

Height irrespective of reach is an advantage - if an opponent punches upward then he is punching in a diagonal trajectory thus loses reach. It's easy to prove - stand facing a wall with your fist against the wall and your arm at full extension, now raise your arm....the higher you raise your arm the more it comes away from the wall; this basic trigonometry translates into losing range when punching toward a taller target. Naturally to maximise advantage Manny would advise Wlad "to keep tall".

In other scenarios keeping tall in close can give a better perspective, almost birds eye view, of incoming shots. However, throwing a body shot without bending at the knee equates to throwing an arm shot with poor leverage - not to mention how exposed you are when you throw this kind of shot. Basicaly it's bad form....and another reason not to rate Wlad's technical ability as high as you suggest.

If we ignore the shots which Wlad himself chooses to ignore then we are left with a limited amount of punches and techniques to rate him on. If we rate these shots only (which he has perfected) then he scores a very deserving 9.5 for technique.

Cunningham is 6.2. Frazier was 5"10. Joe would have a hard time getting close to either brother who are light years ahead of Fury at present.

Fury?? Really, we now comparing a guy who has never seen the canvas with Fury??? Fury!!! The travesty!

Might as well reference Mormeck as evidence that Frazier wont win a 30 second spurt, let alone a round.

Or Qawi........he ws in Frazier's league too..

monty junior wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TheMackemMawler wrote:whats your top 15 Winny?

1. Lewis
2. Haye
3. Bruno
4. Fury
5. Our 'Enry.....

6.Danny Williams
7.A-force
8.Julius Francis
9.Michael Sprott
10.Mike Middleton

What, no Gary Mason? I am shocked and appalled!! RIP Gary. A true gent

Xawi was an anamoly though wasnt he? A 5'5 Cruiserweight. I mean imagine that today... Good on him, pushed Holyfield (arguably won. Argument lost). Might have been the greatest ever if he was a foot taller.

kingraf wrote:Fury?? Really, we now comparing a guy who has never seen the canvas with Fury??? Fury!!! The travesty!

Both Wlad and Frasier have "seen the canvas". Mind you, your point still holds that it ridiculous to bring Fury into this argument.

hazharrison wrote:

Tyson Fury dwarfed Steve Cunningham recently but still ended up on his back (and Cunningham is no puncher at heavyweight). Frazier would tag Wladimir and get him out of there. He'd systematically beat Vitali up.

I agree regarding Wlad, but how would he beat up vitali, how do you think fraizer wont take any big punches, Vitali is a better boxer than foreman (at boxing not saying fighting overall), he punches with more accuracy, he would land on fraizer and he would do damage, in this fight both men would have to take serious damage, with vitali's huge size advantage it would mean its a 50/50 fight

He's talking bout Vitali bhb

kingraf wrote:Xawi was an anamoly though wasnt he? A 5'5 Cruiserweight. I mean imagine that today... Good on him, pushed Holyfield (arguably won. Argument lost). Might have been the greatest ever if he was a foot taller.

he adapted his style to his size, so no

how about his size dictated his style and adaptability wasn't even a consideration?

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

monty junior wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:I can see why Vitali might be a few people's favourite over Frazier, but I wouldn't be totally cocksure about it. It's possible that Frazier could "run in to the jab" all night (against either brother), but it's also possible that his head movement and speed coming inside could take their jabs away and allow him to work on the inside. He made Ali miss a hell of a lot in their first fight, for instance. If that's the case against a Klitschko, and he can get in close to their bodies, it would be an interesting fight.

The thing about both of the Klitschkos is that they've almost never really had to take more than one, perhaps two, big shots in succession for the past ten years, in which they've both (particularly Wladimir) hit their peaks. Frazier's speed in close could change all of that and, while Vitali has a very good chin, it's not impossible that Frazier could put a dent in it. In fairness, much of that is down to how good they are, but some of it is also down to the fact that they haven't faced an exceptional pressure fighter between them, too.

Frazier was a slow starter (the first Bonavena fight being a prime example) and was vulnerable early on before his engine warmed up and before he'd found an attacking rhythm, but then again neither Klitschko really sets a red-hot pace early on, so he probably won't have to worry too much about that here.

I'd probably see Frazier-Klitschko (either one) as a pick 'em, more or less. The second Ali fight, in which Frazier was tied up inside and smothered, gives Wladimir a fair bit of hope (he doesn't throw much on the inside, but is very good at taking the sting out of an opponent's attack there) but I do believe there's evidence each way for this one.

Joe would be so physically inferior physically to both brother's he would be knackered from the clinches as he would always be going backwards with 250 pounds weighing on him. Another problem for Frazier would be actually connecting properly with his left hook, especially to the jaw, he had to launch himself to reach Ali who was next 6,3 compared to the Klitschko's being 6,7. I just think it's a terrible matchup for Joe, he could shake up Wlad sure but I think he would be taken out by both.

Tyson Fury dwarfed Steve Cunningham recently but still ended up on his back (and Cunningham is no puncher at heavyweight). Frazier would tag Wladimir and get him out of there. He'd systematically beat Vitali up.

But Fury won that fight simply because he was taller and weighed more and his weight size advantage won the fight for him. the same outcome would happen if WLad fought Marciano or Frazier.

Cunningham was bulked up and he tired as he couldn't fight at a pace. Frazier was a bonafide heavyweight and could fight at a suffocating clip. David Tua had Lewis on the back foot all night and he wasn't half the fighter Frazier was. Wladimir would have filled his pants if Joe was in with him. He was only a couple inches shorter than Brewster and he knocked the living daylights out of Klitschko.

KO-KING wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

Tyson Fury dwarfed Steve Cunningham recently but still ended up on his back (and Cunningham is no puncher at heavyweight). Frazier would tag Wladimir and get him out of there. He'd systematically beat Vitali up.

I agree regarding Wlad, but how would he beat up vitali, how do you think fraizer wont take any big punches, Vitali is a better boxer than foreman (at boxing not saying fighting overall), he punches with more accuracy, he would land on fraizer and he would do damage, in this fight both men would have to take serious damage, with vitali's huge size advantage it would mean its a 50/50 fight

Vitali hasn't faced anyone who could set a pace like Frazier. Chisora is considered active these days and, as poor as Del is, even that gave Vitali trouble. Frazier was a relentless fighter who'd wear Klitschko down. I don't agree Vitali is a better boxer than George either - he fights like a paralytic giraffe at times. Foreman wasn't as poor as people make out - Archie Moore and Sandy Saddler taught him how to cut off a ring and disable a fighter in close.

TheMackemMawler wrote:how about his size dictated his style and adaptability wasn't even a consideration?

thats another way to look at it

hazharrison wrote:

Cunningham was bulked up and he tired as he couldn't fight at a pace. Frazier was a bonafide heavyweight and could fight at a suffocating clip. David Tua had Lewis on the back foot all night and he wasn't half the fighter Frazier was. Wladimir would have filled his pants if Joe was in with him. He was only a couple inches shorter than Brewster and he knocked the living daylights out of Klitschko.

You are right, but using the example of brewster is a poor comparison, that is not a prime Wladimir, Wladimir later dismantled him in the rematch and even that version was still not prime

hazharrison wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

monty junior wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:I can see why Vitali might be a few people's favourite over Frazier, but I wouldn't be totally cocksure about it. It's possible that Frazier could "run in to the jab" all night (against either brother), but it's also possible that his head movement and speed coming inside could take their jabs away and allow him to work on the inside. He made Ali miss a hell of a lot in their first fight, for instance. If that's the case against a Klitschko, and he can get in close to their bodies, it would be an interesting fight.

The thing about both of the Klitschkos is that they've almost never really had to take more than one, perhaps two, big shots in succession for the past ten years, in which they've both (particularly Wladimir) hit their peaks. Frazier's speed in close could change all of that and, while Vitali has a very good chin, it's not impossible that Frazier could put a dent in it. In fairness, much of that is down to how good they are, but some of it is also down to the fact that they haven't faced an exceptional pressure fighter between them, too.

Frazier was a slow starter (the first Bonavena fight being a prime example) and was vulnerable early on before his engine warmed up and before he'd found an attacking rhythm, but then again neither Klitschko really sets a red-hot pace early on, so he probably won't have to worry too much about that here.

I'd probably see Frazier-Klitschko (either one) as a pick 'em, more or less. The second Ali fight, in which Frazier was tied up inside and smothered, gives Wladimir a fair bit of hope (he doesn't throw much on the inside, but is very good at taking the sting out of an opponent's attack there) but I do believe there's evidence each way for this one.

Joe would be so physically inferior physically to both brother's he would be knackered from the clinches as he would always be going backwards with 250 pounds weighing on him. Another problem for Frazier would be actually connecting properly with his left hook, especially to the jaw, he had to launch himself to reach Ali who was next 6,3 compared to the Klitschko's being 6,7. I just think it's a terrible matchup for Joe, he could shake up Wlad sure but I think he would be taken out by both.

Tyson Fury dwarfed Steve Cunningham recently but still ended up on his back (and Cunningham is no puncher at heavyweight). Frazier would tag Wladimir and get him out of there. He'd systematically beat Vitali up.

But Fury won that fight simply because he was taller and weighed more and his weight size advantage won the fight for him. the same outcome would happen if WLad fought Marciano or Frazier.

Cunningham was bulked up and he tired as he couldn't fight at a pace. Frazier was a bonafide heavyweight and could fight at a suffocating clip. David Tua had Lewis on the back foot all night and he wasn't half the fighter Frazier was. Wladimir would have filled his pants if Joe was in with him. He was only a couple inches shorter than Brewster and he knocked the living daylights out of Klitschko.

I think you are letting your dislike for he Klitchkos get in the way of common sense.

Vitali is 6ft 8 and 250lbs, Frazier was 5ft 10 and 195lbs. That alone is a massive stumbling block.

Vitali has a chin of iron and it would be near impossible he gets KO'd.

Vitali in his prime (04-10) was a massive puncher with the highest KO percentage of any HW in history.

hazharrison wrote:

KO-KING wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

Tyson Fury dwarfed Steve Cunningham recently but still ended up on his back (and Cunningham is no puncher at heavyweight). Frazier would tag Wladimir and get him out of there. He'd systematically beat Vitali up.

I agree regarding Wlad, but how would he beat up vitali, how do you think fraizer wont take any big punches, Vitali is a better boxer than foreman (at boxing not saying fighting overall), he punches with more accuracy, he would land on fraizer and he would do damage, in this fight both men would have to take serious damage, with vitali's huge size advantage it would mean its a 50/50 fight

Vitali hasn't faced anyone who could set a pace like Frazier. Chisora is considered active these days and, as poor as Del is, even that gave Vitali trouble. Frazier was a relentless fighter who'd wear Klitschko down. I don't agree Vitali is a better boxer than George either - he fights like a paralytic giraffe at times. Foreman wasn't as poor as people make out - Archie Moore and Sandy Saddler taught him how to cut off a ring and disable a fighter in close.

So you want to compare a prime Frazier to a past his prime Vitali in the Chisora fight? And even in the Chisora fight Vitali won it by a landslide. Not to mention Chisora is 6ft 2 and 250lbs not 5ft 10 and 195lbs.

bhb001 wrote:

kingraf wrote:Fury?? Really, we now comparing a guy who has never seen the canvas with Fury??? Fury!!! The travesty!

Both Wlad and Frasier have "seen the canvas". Mind you, your point still holds that it ridiculous to bring Fury into this argument.

No it isn't - some posts on here claim that size alone would do for Frazier which is poppycock. Louis demolished Buddy Baer and Carnera, Dempsey splattered Willard, Chagaev and Haye dealt with Valuev, Thad Spencer overcame big Ernie Terrell. Frazier - a great fighter - would have dealt with Wlad's size - he'd have got under those arms and beaten him to a pulp inside.

hazharrison wrote:

Vitali hasn't faced anyone who could set a pace like Frazier. Chisora is considered active these days and, as poor as Del is, even that gave Vitali trouble. Frazier was a relentless fighter who'd wear Klitschko down. I don't agree Vitali is a better boxer than George either - he fights like a paralytic giraffe at times. Foreman wasn't as poor as people make out - Archie Moore and Sandy Saddler taught him how to cut off a ring and disable a fighter in close.

You must be half blind to think that was a prime or even close to prime Vitali, just watch a vitali fight from 10 years ago, you say Vitali hasn't faced anyone who could set a pace like Fraizer, well Frazier has never faced a 6' 7" fighter who at his peak could throw 60+ punches with power.

'he fights like a paralytic giraffe at times' - stop being so biased, Vitali is an outstanding boxer, he may look weird. but its effective,

'Foreman wasn't as poor as people make out' - Foreman was a very good boxer, he had an excellent jab as well, he won a Gold Medal in the Olympics, but vitali was just a better boxer.

Stop using examples of fights where they are out of prime, fraizer drew against a bum called Floyd Cummings, Ali lost to Spinks - also a bum

If we have devolved into a debate revolving around "this version of W beats this version of X because 40 years ago this version of Y done this when fighting that version Z then i want to add if Joe Bugner took frasier to points then Vitali beats him.

I want to add that I was talking about Vitali not smelling the canvas not Wlad, or has everyone accepted that Vitali beats Frazier?

TheMackemMawler wrote:If we have devolved into a debate revolving around "this version of W beats this version of X because 40 years ago this version of Y done this when fighting that version Z then i want to add if Joe Bugner took frasier to points then Vitali beats him.

People need to stop being biased and use common sense, to compare fighters from different era's, you have to take prime versions of each other, so a Fraizer from 69-73 vs Vitali 2002-04, he wasnt the same when he came back, declined further since about 2010, Wlad from 2008-Present

KO-KING wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

Cunningham was bulked up and he tired as he couldn't fight at a pace. Frazier was a bonafide heavyweight and could fight at a suffocating clip. David Tua had Lewis on the back foot all night and he wasn't half the fighter Frazier was. Wladimir would have filled his pants if Joe was in with him. He was only a couple inches shorter than Brewster and he knocked the living daylights out of Klitschko.

You are right, but using the example of brewster is a poor comparison, that is not a prime Wladimir, Wladimir later dismantled him in the rematch and even that version was still not prime

28 isn't "prime" years? Really? Brewster was coming off a loss having been inactive for 15 months. He had also suffered a detached retina so save me the excuses for Wlad's capitulation when Brewster was on his game.

kingraf wrote:I want to add that I was talking about Vitali not smelling the canvas not Wlad, or has everyone accepted that Vitali beats Frazier?

Vitali vs Fraizer is a genuine 50/50 fight, why are both sides so adamant one fighter will win, neither of them are so superior to the other, against Wlad, Fraizer has the power to remove him from his senses, against vitali, he is the superior inside and mid range fighter, but Vitali also has a very high work rate and is the better outside fighter, along with his huge size advantage, pushing Fraizer around, would tire him out

TheMackemMawler wrote:If we have devolved into a debate revolving around "this version of W beats this version of X because 40 years ago this version of Y done this when fighting that version Z then i want to add if Joe Bugner took frasier to points then Vitali beats him.

Joe Bugner would have given both brothers fits!!

hazharrison wrote:

KO-KING wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

Cunningham was bulked up and he tired as he couldn't fight at a pace. Frazier was a bonafide heavyweight and could fight at a suffocating clip. David Tua had Lewis on the back foot all night and he wasn't half the fighter Frazier was. Wladimir would have filled his pants if Joe was in with him. He was only a couple inches shorter than Brewster and he knocked the living daylights out of Klitschko.

You are right, but using the example of brewster is a poor comparison, that is not a prime Wladimir, Wladimir later dismantled him in the rematch and even that version was still not prime

28 isn't "prime" years? Really? Brewster was coming off a loss having been inactive for 15 months. He had also suffered a detached retina so save me the excuses for Wlad's capitulation when Brewster was on his game.

Age doesn't equal prime. If you think Wlad was in his prime in the 90's when he lost to brewster than I suggest you do some more research.

hazharrison wrote:

KO-KING wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

Cunningham was bulked up and he tired as he couldn't fight at a pace. Frazier was a bonafide heavyweight and could fight at a suffocating clip. David Tua had Lewis on the back foot all night and he wasn't half the fighter Frazier was. Wladimir would have filled his pants if Joe was in with him. He was only a couple inches shorter than Brewster and he knocked the living daylights out of Klitschko.

You are right, but using the example of brewster is a poor comparison, that is not a prime Wladimir, Wladimir later dismantled him in the rematch and even that version was still not prime

28 isn't "prime" years? Really? Brewster was coming off a loss having been inactive for 15 months. He had also suffered a detached retina so save me the excuses for Wlad's capitulation when Brewster was on his game.

OK, now am giving up, you are just trolling about here, surely, or are you that stupid, not everyone's prime comes during the same years e.g. Hopkins reached his peak past his mid 30's, Roy jones was shot by then, Fraizer was remover from his prime by the time he was in his early 30's. Wladimir from his early 30's started to improve - dramatically

KO-KING wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

Vitali hasn't faced anyone who could set a pace like Frazier. Chisora is considered active these days and, as poor as Del is, even that gave Vitali trouble. Frazier was a relentless fighter who'd wear Klitschko down. I don't agree Vitali is a better boxer than George either - he fights like a paralytic giraffe at times. Foreman wasn't as poor as people make out - Archie Moore and Sandy Saddler taught him how to cut off a ring and disable a fighter in close.

You must be half blind to think that was a prime or even close to prime Vitali, just watch a vitali fight from 10 years ago, you say Vitali hasn't faced anyone who could set a pace like Fraizer, well Frazier has never faced a 6' 7" fighter who at his peak could throw 60+ punches with power.

'he fights like a paralytic giraffe at times' - stop being so biased, Vitali is an outstanding boxer, he may look weird. but its effective,

'Foreman wasn't as poor as people make out' - Foreman was a very good boxer, he had an excellent jab as well, he won a Gold Medal in the Olympics, but vitali was just a better boxer.

Stop using examples of fights where they are out of prime, fraizer drew against a bum called Floyd Cummings, Ali lost to Spinks - also a bum

Vitali has always looked the same - rarely changed. If a shot Lennox Lewis could have him out on his feet - a peak Joe Frazier would whup him. You're the one making ridiculous assertions. Vitali was just a better boxer...Sanders hit harder than Frazier. Absolute tosh.

Hoppo didn't reach his peak past his mid 30s.........

Because people are at their physical peak in their early-mid 20s.........

He might have had more success......but he wasn't at his peak....

Ali was at his peak in the 60s although his best wins were in the 70s..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Hoppo didn't reach his peak past his mid 30s.........

Because people are at their physical peak in their early-mid 20s.........

He might have had more success......but he wasn't at his peak....

Ali was at his peak in the 60s although his best wins were in the 70s..

Truss you had this debate on another thread, no need to turn this thread into that same debate.

It's relevant kiddo.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Hoppo didn't reach his peak past his mid 30s.........

Because people are at their physical peak in their early-mid 20s.........

He might have had more success......but he wasn't at his peak....

Ali was at his peak in the 60s although his best wins were in the 70s..

I agree. 28 is peak years for a heavyweight (physically).

KO-KING wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

KO-KING wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

Cunningham was bulked up and he tired as he couldn't fight at a pace. Frazier was a bonafide heavyweight and could fight at a suffocating clip. David Tua had Lewis on the back foot all night and he wasn't half the fighter Frazier was. Wladimir would have filled his pants if Joe was in with him. He was only a couple inches shorter than Brewster and he knocked the living daylights out of Klitschko.

You are right, but using the example of brewster is a poor comparison, that is not a prime Wladimir, Wladimir later dismantled him in the rematch and even that version was still not prime

28 isn't "prime" years? Really? Brewster was coming off a loss having been inactive for 15 months. He had also suffered a detached retina so save me the excuses for Wlad's capitulation when Brewster was on his game.

OK, now am giving up, you are just trolling about here, surely, or are you that stupid, not everyone's prime comes during the same years e.g. Hopkins reached his peak past his mid 30's, Roy jones was shot by then, Fraizer was remover from his prime by the time he was in his early 30's. Wladimir from his early 30's started to improve - dramatically

I'm not stupid, no.

hazharrison wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Hoppo didn't reach his peak past his mid 30s.........

Because people are at their physical peak in their early-mid 20s.........

He might have had more success......but he wasn't at his peak....

Ali was at his peak in the 60s although his best wins were in the 70s..

I agree. 28 is peak years for a heavyweight (physically).

Ok well going by your very simplistic views we need to compare a prime frazier to a past his peak version of Wlad if we want it to be fair because frazier was better in his prime whilst wlad is better past his peak

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

KO-KING wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

Cunningham was bulked up and he tired as he couldn't fight at a pace. Frazier was a bonafide heavyweight and could fight at a suffocating clip. David Tua had Lewis on the back foot all night and he wasn't half the fighter Frazier was. Wladimir would have filled his pants if Joe was in with him. He was only a couple inches shorter than Brewster and he knocked the living daylights out of Klitschko.

You are right, but using the example of brewster is a poor comparison, that is not a prime Wladimir, Wladimir later dismantled him in the rematch and even that version was still not prime

28 isn't "prime" years? Really? Brewster was coming off a loss having been inactive for 15 months. He had also suffered a detached retina so save me the excuses for Wlad's capitulation when Brewster was on his game.

Age doesn't equal prime. If you think Wlad was in his prime in the 90's when he lost to brewster than I suggest you do some more research.

Why would I need to research Klitschko's career? I've lived through it which has been bad enough. Klitschko was closer to his best first time than Brewster was to his in the do-over.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Hoppo didn't reach his peak past his mid 30s.........

Because people are at their physical peak in their early-mid 20s.........

He might have had more success......but he wasn't at his peak....

Ali was at his peak in the 60s although his best wins were in the 70s..

I agree. 28 is peak years for a heavyweight (physically).

Ok well going by your very simplistic views we need to compare a prime frazier to a past his peak version of Wlad if we want it to be fair because frazier was better in his prime whilst wlad is better past his peak

Either way he gets his teeth handed to him so surmise away.

Have you actually watched the Klitsckho vs Lewis fight? Vitali out on his feet? Really? In what round? I watched it this afternoon again just to se if I could spot these "jabs for fun" Lewis apparently landed. I thought he got 40% connection, looked it up, turned out he had 43%, so apogies to Truss, he was a little more accurate than I thought. Thag said Klitschko landed more punches than him overrall, and was not out on his feet. A doctor doesnt stop you for cuts because "Youre out on your feet".

hazharrison wrote:

monty junior wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:I can see why Vitali might be a few people's favourite over Frazier, but I wouldn't be totally cocksure about it. It's possible that Frazier could "run in to the jab" all night (against either brother), but it's also possible that his head movement and speed coming inside could take their jabs away and allow him to work on the inside. He made Ali miss a hell of a lot in their first fight, for instance. If that's the case against a Klitschko, and he can get in close to their bodies, it would be an interesting fight.

The thing about both of the Klitschkos is that they've almost never really had to take more than one, perhaps two, big shots in succession for the past ten years, in which they've both (particularly Wladimir) hit their peaks. Frazier's speed in close could change all of that and, while Vitali has a very good chin, it's not impossible that Frazier could put a dent in it. In fairness, much of that is down to how good they are, but some of it is also down to the fact that they haven't faced an exceptional pressure fighter between them, too.

Frazier was a slow starter (the first Bonavena fight being a prime example) and was vulnerable early on before his engine warmed up and before he'd found an attacking rhythm, but then again neither Klitschko really sets a red-hot pace early on, so he probably won't have to worry too much about that here.

I'd probably see Frazier-Klitschko (either one) as a pick 'em, more or less. The second Ali fight, in which Frazier was tied up inside and smothered, gives Wladimir a fair bit of hope (he doesn't throw much on the inside, but is very good at taking the sting out of an opponent's attack there) but I do believe there's evidence each way for this one.

Joe would be so physically inferior physically to both brother's he would be knackered from the clinches as he would always be going backwards with 250 pounds weighing on him. Another problem for Frazier would be actually connecting properly with his left hook, especially to the jaw, he had to launch himself to reach Ali who was next 6,3 compared to the Klitschko's being 6,7. I just think it's a terrible matchup for Joe, he could shake up Wlad sure but I think he would be taken out by both.

Tyson Fury dwarfed Steve Cunningham recently but still ended up on his back (and Cunningham is no puncher at heavyweight). Frazier would tag Wladimir and get him out of there. He'd systematically beat Vitali up.

How can you possibly compare a mindless idiotic plodder like Fury to Wladimir Klitschko? It's such a daft comparison it beggars belief.

kingraf wrote:Have you actually watched the Klitsckho vs Lewis fight? Vitali out on his feet? Really? In what round? I watched it this afternoon again just to se if I could spot these "jabs for fun" Lewis apparently landed. I thought he got 40% connection, looked it up, turned out he had 43%, so apogies to Truss, he was a little more accurate than I thought. Thag said Klitschko landed more punches than him overrall, and was not out on his feet. A doctor doesnt stop you for cuts because "Youre out on your feet".

Watch it again. Vitali was knackered going back to his corner after 6. Lewis was taking over the fight in rounds 5 & 6 despite looking shattered himself.

Im comparing Mormeck to Frazier from now on, if thats the line we going with. This damn Lewis defeat is unfair. Its not his fault he had Silky skin, and Lewis mistimed a punch so bad he caught Witaly's cheek with his thumb. Damn Lewis' wife for threatening him with divorce if he didnt retire from boxing after the Vitaliy fight. It would have set the record straight, so long as Vitaly came in reasonably unshaven.

monty junior wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

monty junior wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:I can see why Vitali might be a few people's favourite over Frazier, but I wouldn't be totally cocksure about it. It's possible that Frazier could "run in to the jab" all night (against either brother), but it's also possible that his head movement and speed coming inside could take their jabs away and allow him to work on the inside. He made Ali miss a hell of a lot in their first fight, for instance. If that's the case against a Klitschko, and he can get in close to their bodies, it would be an interesting fight.

The thing about both of the Klitschkos is that they've almost never really had to take more than one, perhaps two, big shots in succession for the past ten years, in which they've both (particularly Wladimir) hit their peaks. Frazier's speed in close could change all of that and, while Vitali has a very good chin, it's not impossible that Frazier could put a dent in it. In fairness, much of that is down to how good they are, but some of it is also down to the fact that they haven't faced an exceptional pressure fighter between them, too.

Frazier was a slow starter (the first Bonavena fight being a prime example) and was vulnerable early on before his engine warmed up and before he'd found an attacking rhythm, but then again neither Klitschko really sets a red-hot pace early on, so he probably won't have to worry too much about that here.

I'd probably see Frazier-Klitschko (either one) as a pick 'em, more or less. The second Ali fight, in which Frazier was tied up inside and smothered, gives Wladimir a fair bit of hope (he doesn't throw much on the inside, but is very good at taking the sting out of an opponent's attack there) but I do believe there's evidence each way for this one.

Joe would be so physically inferior physically to both brother's he would be knackered from the clinches as he would always be going backwards with 250 pounds weighing on him. Another problem for Frazier would be actually connecting properly with his left hook, especially to the jaw, he had to launch himself to reach Ali who was next 6,3 compared to the Klitschko's being 6,7. I just think it's a terrible matchup for Joe, he could shake up Wlad sure but I think he would be taken out by both.

Tyson Fury dwarfed Steve Cunningham recently but still ended up on his back (and Cunningham is no puncher at heavyweight). Frazier would tag Wladimir and get him out of there. He'd systematically beat Vitali up.

How can you possibly compare a mindless idiotic plodder like Fury to Wladimir Klitschko? It's such a daft comparison it beggars belief.

I was comparing the size differential in Fury-Cunningham to Klitschko-Frazier. I didn't compare them as fighters.

hazharrison wrote:

Vitali has always looked the same - rarely changed. If a shot Lennox Lewis could have him out on his feet - a peak Joe Frazier would whup him. You're the one making ridiculous assertions. Vitali was just a better boxer...Sanders hit harder than Frazier. Absolute tosh.

Based on their similar size and style...

I never said that, why would I say Saunders hit like Fraizer, one thing about fraizer, he hardly went to the head with his right.

hazharrison wrote:

kingraf wrote:Have you actually watched the Klitsckho vs Lewis fight? Vitali out on his feet? Really? In what round? I watched it this afternoon again just to se if I could spot these "jabs for fun" Lewis apparently landed. I thought he got 40% connection, looked it up, turned out he had 43%, so apogies to Truss, he was a little more accurate than I thought. Thag said Klitschko landed more punches than him overrall, and was not out on his feet. A doctor doesnt stop you for cuts because "Youre out on your feet".

Watch it again. Vitali was knackered going back to his corner after 6. Lewis was taking over the fight in rounds 5 & 6 despite looking shattered himself.

You are strting to sound like winchester or gordy with the rubbish you talk. You seem to dismiss nearly a foot height advantage and nearly 60lbs weight advantage like it is nothing.

I did, and its true. The guy could have had it all. Instead he was just a decent putter, with a semi decent drive.