Who's higher - Bowe's wins vs Wlad's longevity ???

Riddick Bowe gets a tough rap on here...Wrongly accused of cowardice against Lewis ..when in all reality as in the KO head to head most picked him to beat a 1994-Lewis (that's a 1994 Lewis!!).........Remember Eddie futch just before mccall stuffed Lewis saying he didn't rate him at all...For sure he had a duck in the hunt but he was right not too....Lewis was average back then !!..Bowe knocks him out for me..

However...........If you consider a win to be a win..............

Bowe beat a prime Hofer in Holyfield twice.........a top rated Pierre Coetzer...........Unbeaten Larry Donald...........unbeaten highly rated Jorge Luis Gonzalez......Unbeaten Herbie Hide...and like it or not an unbeaten Andrew Golota twice too.........(Louis is credited with walcott 1 and even he believed he lost that!!)

Considering Wlad was punched out by the less than stellar Sanders and Brewster...Though he avenged the latter...Haye apart who is in no way shape or form a peak Holyfield .........he's fought years of crud.............

How much emphasis do you put in longevity...........Me I don't put much...I don't think Eusebio Pedroza was a great fighter...He is because Laporte apart he beat crud for seven years.........Taylor the best fighter he fought he drew with.........Olivares was shot when Eusebio fought him....

I find Bowe's record more impressive than Wlad's..........A peak Holyfield is a wonderful win and Holy is a top 10 heavy for me !!

Not Wlad's fault but he hasn't really fought anybody.......

For me Bowe is higher..........

Head to head I'd pick Bowe comfortably, as for all time rating Wlads longevity takes it for me. I agree a win against Holyfield is better than anything on Wlads record, but title defences against Dokes and Jesse Ferguson are hardly ATG status.

However you could argue is Wlad the man with big brother still in the frame, Klitschko is no better than Primo for me but has managed to stack up an awful lot of defences.

Cheers Rodders

It's a decent question, Beefcake, but I think you're over-egging Bowe's victims a bit. Don't care how highly rated Coetzer was at the time, he was rubbish. Larry Donald? Wouldn't say that was a better win than Wlad beating Haye. Decent skills but lacking in heart was old Larry. He was intimidated after Big Daddy smacked him at the presser.

Gonzalez? Great amateur but got exposed in the pro-ranks. Talked a better fight than he ever delivered. Herbie Hide? Had a chin like David Price and was clearly a flat track bully of the highest order. Golota was whipping your boy before all the low blows.

Having said that, Wlad doesn't have much on his ledger that is better, but he has made the best of his talent and performed at his peak for much longer than Bowe. He has nothing that comes close to beating Evander but that is hardly his fault.

On a peak head to head, then Bowe wins 7 out of 10 for me, but it depends on how highly you rank longevity against 'big' wins. For me, if it is a head to head list then Bowe is way higher, but I like to reward longevity as it shows mental fortitude and as such, I would rank Wladimir higher.

Surprised how highly some rate Bowe. Wlad kicks his backside with something to spare, for me.

Fists of Fury wrote:Surprised how highly some rate Bowe. Wlad kicks his backside with something to spare, for me.

Wlad kicks Louis butt so what...

Bowe beat a lot of fancied unbeaten fighters............Losses hurt careers..some fighters aren't the same again..

Holy x 2 are great wins not good ones...........How much is longevity worth.........

Fists of Fury wrote:Surprised how highly some rate Bowe. Wlad kicks his backside with something to spare, for me.

He was awesome in the first Holyfield fight. There is not much to suggest Wladimir could handle that version of Bowe. He has a punchers chance, obviously.

Just a shame Bowe became fat and lazy as his potential was enormous.

Wlad kicks Louis butt ??

Watch Klitschko v Brewster and tell me again that he kicks he's butt. Can see Baer all over again, Bowe has far too much for Klitschko much more all rounded.


Cheers Rodders

If you are talking about taking the zero from people in world title fights, Wlad has done this at least five times. You can slate the opponents now, as many could for Bowe, but they were unbeaten when they went up against Klitschko. Longevity isn't everything, but in this case it shades it for me. To quote Truss back at him when talking about Fury I believe, you can only fight who is in front of you.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:Surprised how highly some rate Bowe. Wlad kicks his backside with something to spare, for me.

He was awesome in the first Holyfield fight.  There is not much to suggest Wladimir could handle that version of Bowe.  He has a punchers chance, obviously.

Just a shame Bowe became fat and lazy as his potential was enormous.

Lost to the fridg but Tino is right the Bowe that beat Holy was awesome......If Brewster/Sanders knock wlad out then !!!!!!!!!!..........

I count lewis-Vitali to be one of Lewis best wins..........and a win is a win........Unbeaten Golota is a credit for Bowe...

Rodney wrote:Wlad kicks Louis butt ??

Watch Klitschko v Brewster and tell me again that he kicks he's butt. Can see Baer all over again, Bowe has far too much for Klitschko much more all rounded.


Cheers Rodders

Too big Roddy.....He is better than Primo and If lands Louis goes......Sorry Mate....Can't see how Louis at 200 beats him..

Couldn't care about the weight advantage mate, can't see how Klitschko wins seriously. This is a guy who went life and death with the seriously inept Samuel Peter, flattened off Sanders and Brewster.

Louis has the perfect style to beat him, unlike to today's dross he can slip and parry a jab with he's feet planted enable to counter rapidly, Wlad would be in melt down. I don't know why a win against Haye is so highly regarded, Haye must be one of the poorest alphabet champs in the modern era.

Cheers Rodders

He had the perfect style to beat who...Rodders ???

He lost to Walcott (he admitted it) and was behind in their return when he pulled it out....lost to Charles and Marciano.....

and If we are honest they are the only top heavy-fighters he fought...

Without him being decked off Braddock..smashed off Schmelling and dumped by Galento......

Who knows If you're right but you are overselling Louis for sure..wlad lands he goes..

Ill not turn the thread into a Louis/Wlad one Truss, we'll agree to differ.

Cheers Rodders

I keep hearing that big daddy was brilliant before Golota. He did have some great performances, but the mediocre ones are conveniently overlooked. Like scraping past tubbs for example. Not that tubbs wasn't an awkward customer. Herbie 'the passing breeze' hide had him in trouble.

The consensus seems to be that bowe beats the Lewis of that time but not the later one. Personally, I think he has a chance against either version of Lewis but I think the younger, more aggressive version might give him more to think about than the older cagier Lewis. We'll never know.

It's not cut and dried when comparing a brief good prime against an arguably less impressive longer reign, but for me, it's only the holy trilogy really on bowe's ledger, so I'd err to wlad's time at the top outweighing it. Can see the counter argument though.

Who keeps telling you he was brilliant...You're hearing things Mate..

Hammered the unbeaten breeze easily.......Lewis was in trouble against Briggs, Akinwande..outboxed by Bruno and should have lost to Mercer in many eyes...

Easy to make cheap pops..

I like Wlad as he is a classy champion but his opposition is so poor he can only really be measured by his losses. Against the greats Wlad wouldn't be allowed to be so cagey hiding behind his bulk and reach. The top HW's of the past with a good dig would expose him again and again in my view. Vitali would be a different prospect because of his toughness.

For the reasons above Bowe KO's Wlad as would have Lewis.

Asking who's higher is a bit different to wondering which of the two might win in a head to head, and I think that accordingly, there are different answers. Head to head, the Bowe that beat Holyfield first time more often than not outclasses the Wlad who beat Haye so comfortably, in my view.

However, longevity does count for something, or Louis and Holmes wouldn't rank quite as high as they do, their marvellous skills notwithstanding. Bowe's peak is just too short for him to rank ahead of WK as far as I can see. Golota may count as a pair of victories, but the truth is a bit more awkward than that. WK has improved as he's aged, while Bowe didn't age at all - he fell off a cliff.

Both men in the top 20, but WK is three or four spots higher, I would say.

Hardly a cheap pop truss. You think bowe gets a rough ride on here, I think the fact that many pick him to beat Lewis at the time suggests the contrary. Very talented fighter riddick no doubt. On previous threads others have presented him as virtually  untouchable pre evander, whilst highlighting the fact that lewis was behind on points to bruno etc. I'm just providing some perspective.

For the record, I know haz was trying to tell us that Lewis was wobbled by akinwande (from a push when his knee touched down) during a hatchet job on Lewis but its fairly preposterous to anyone who watched the fight. He fought mercer's fight and it was a Pickem, re the other 'in troubles' was he really? Caught by some good shots, but hardly in dire straights.

Whichever, it's not a Lewis thread. Like I said, I err to wlad's longevity but can see the argument to the contrary.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Who keeps telling you he was brilliant...You're hearing things Mate..

Hammered the unbeaten breeze easily.......Lewis was in trouble against Briggs, Akinwande..outboxed by Bruno  and should have lost to Mercer in many eyes...

Easy to make cheap pops..

You do like your revisionist history when it comes to Lennox, don't you, T-Bone. One could almost be forgiven for thinking you had only watched the fights once.....

I will give you Mercer, you could make a pretty good argument for him losing that.

But, Akinwande? The only trouble had had was trying to stop Henry groping him like a pervert. The knockdown was nothing of the sort, and Lewis wasn't remotely hurt. Yes, Bruno was giving him some trouble, he gave lots of people issues. Fact is, the fight was barely over half way when it was stopped. Lewis won that one, by the way. Briggs? He treated him with a some disdain as he knew he was better in every aspect and also knew that Briggs had spent most of his training camp stuffing dollar notes down the pants of girls on the strip. Lewis won that one, as well. Remember?

You're telling Milky not to take cheap pops in the very post that you've done just that.

Sorry, I may have well re-posted Milky's effort.

Fists of Fury wrote:Surprised how highly some rate Bowe. Wlad kicks his backside with something to spare, for me.

No chance. Bowe at his best would have bombed him out.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Rodney wrote:Wlad kicks Louis butt ??

Watch Klitschko v Brewster and tell me again that he kicks he's butt. Can see Baer all over again, Bowe has far too much for Klitschko much more all rounded.


Cheers Rodders

Too big Roddy.....He is better than Primo and If lands Louis goes......Sorry Mate....Can't see how Louis at 200 beats him..

If Louis was privy to the same potions and concoctions fighters nowadays are he'd be bigger. Likewise, if Wlad was transported to Louis's era he'd be smaller.

Louis would be too quick and would hit far too hard for Wlad. He'd win by knockout.

The thing with wlad is we know he'll go if you catch him, but he's proven nearly impossible to catch since he's learnt the leap back and grab defence. I'd back peak bowe to solve the problem head to head, but as no-one's yet shown us how, there remains that element of doubt.

It's a close call for me. Bowe would win a head-to-head yet Wlad's longevity closes the gap on Bowe's finer achievements.

Both are probably hovering at the lower end of the top 20 (perhaps just outside).

milkyboy wrote:The thing with wlad is we know he'll go if you catch him, but he's proven nearly impossible to catch since he's learnt the leap back and grab defence. I'd back peak bowe to solve the problem head to head, but as no-one's yet shown us how, there remains that element of doubt.

Bowe used to throw hand grenades, he'd swing for the fences. That'd be tough for Wlad to pick off.

In close, Bowe would murder him so Wlad would have to stay on the run for the most part and Bowe had an excellent jab to pick him off (when he was on form).

How many times is TRUSS gonna trot out the old "Louis lost to Marciano" as 'proof' that he was garbage? As has already been established, Joe Louis was 150 years old when he fought Rocky Marciano.

Bowe is unlucky because his star shone brightly but briefly. It didn't help that his first 2 defences were against a half-dead Dokes and a knackered never-really-had-it Ferguson. Sadly it was his badly-managed stunt of dropping the belt in the bin which gets him all the ridicule in the world & his refusal (whether by him or his management) to fight Lewis. it was a winnable fight for him; I just think there was that nagging doubt in his head so he took the easy option. By the time the Golota fights came around he was sadly on the slide. I think the belt in the bin will always stand against him.

Mr Bounce wrote:I think the belt in the bin will always stand against him.

And so it should. It was a pretty brain-dead stunt although Newman was clearly the brains behind it.

He was a loud mouth blowhard. Full of bile and invective. Good stunt with the perspex screen between between Bowe and Gonzalez though. Made for good press conferences. The bin effort just made Bowe look scared, no matter how must bluster Newman managed to spout.

It was a fairly cack handed stunt. Bowe would not be the first guy to dump a belt because he felt there were better paydays or bigger challenges out there by doing so, even Lewis did it rather than face Ruiz as his mandatory but the manner he did it was always going to be perceived in a certain way. Very poor decision on Newman's part from a PR perspective.

Tino I rate Newman as nothing more than a nasty little manipulative weasel. How he thought that binning the belt would look good and effectively sidestepping the WBC mandatory is beyond me. How Bowe thought it would have been a good idea as well makes me genuinely think he was scared. I wonder if Lewis was the mandatory for the IBF & WBA belts as well would they have thrown them all away???

Really tough one. I'd have Bowe just edging a head to head with Wlad - maybe 6 out of every 10 fights.

The Holyfield wins were great, and I'm of the opinion that Holyfield would have given Wlad nightmares if they'd fought peak to peak. But, Wlad's longevity and dominance just edge it for me. Bowe had better 'best wins', but he was nothing like the dominant professional that Wlad has been. Very close overall though.

Oh, and no way can you say the Golota DQs are a positive for Bowe's legacy.

Although I'd back Bowe to trash him head to head as he'd utterly maul him on the inside and has the chin, speed and power to outbox him along with being a better natural boxer, I'd rank Wlad higher.

Maybe Bowe couldve dominated the nineties. He's younger than Lewis isn't he? He couldve improved too. With the brains and dedication I don't see Holyfield getting that close revenge win or anybody else apart from Lewis starting as favourite.

Bowe: Talent
Wlad: Effort

DAVE667 wrote:How many times is TRUSS gonna trot out the old "Louis lost to Marciano" as 'proof' that he was garbage? As has already been established, Joe Louis was 150 years old when he fought Rocky Marciano.

Louis is number 2 on my list.........Hardly garbage....and I did mention Charles as well..

I think the fact Wlad has been a champion for a decade put him above Bowe.

Klitschko is the longest reigning IBF, WBO & IBO Heavyweight Champion in history with the most title defenses for those organisations. Overall, he is the 2nd longest reigning Heavyweight Champion of all time with the 3rd most consecutive title defenses at 14.

Klitschko (21-2) is tied for 3rd most heavyweight title fights won at 21 with Larry Holmes (21-5). Muhammad Ali (24-3) won 24 title fights and Joe Louis (26-1) stands at number 1 with 26 title fights won in the division.

Would never have thought with your username that you'd be blowing the trumpet of Wladimir, those statistics all sound very impressive but the IBF, WBO and IBO are all relatively new organisations. It's only really been Holmes in the latter half of his heavyweight reign that has concentrated on defending them so you do have to take it with a pinch of salt nor do numbers by themselves give an indication of opposition fought. Their opposition wasn't fantastic but all of Tyson, Frazier, Lewis and Holmes were consistently beating better fighters, even his own brother has beaten better ones.

Wlad has been a champion for longer than all of Tyson, Lewis, Liston, Frazier, Foreman, Jeffries, Johnson and Holyfield but would I ever consider having him higher? Not a chance.

Ultimately longevity is a measure that is used when the level of opposition faced is poor, we don't mention Alis longevity or Robinsons or Leonards because the boxers they managed to beat is of more significance.

The Terror of Tylorstown wrote:Would never have thought with your username that you'd be blowing the trumpet of Wladimir, those statistics all sound very impressive but the IBF, WBO and IBO are all relatively new organisations. It's only really been Holmes in the latter half of his heavyweight reign that has concentrated on defending them so you do have to take it with a pinch of salt nor do numbers by themselves give an indication of opposition fought. Their opposition wasn't fantastic but all of Tyson, Frazier, Lewis and Holmes were consistently beating better fighters, even his own brother has beaten better ones.

Wlad has been a champion for longer than all of Tyson, Lewis, Liston, Frazier, Foreman, Jeffries, Johnson and Holyfield but would I ever consider having him higher? Not a chance.

Ultimately longevity is a measure that is used when the level of opposition faced is poor, we don't mention Alis longevity or Robinsons or Leonards because the boxers they managed to beat is of more significance.

You have to remember that that Wladimir is still fighting so any records he has now will only be improved.

The debate is about longevity against quality. Bowe has fought the better opponents but Kitschko has been at the top for a lot longer.

Also Klitschkos opponents over his 20 year career have not been as bad as some suggest. Botha, Rahman, Tony Thompson, ray mercer, jameel McCline, Samuel peter (undefeated), Ibragimov, chagaev and david Haye are not as bad as some people suggest.

Also as Klitschko is still fighting he has the time to get more names under his belt including Povetkin who he is fighting in 2 months and Tyson fury, Wilder, Chisora and Pulev who will all build up very good records when they face Klitschko.

He could well improve those records but when your best opponent is David Haye it doesn't really mean a lot and when Ibragimov, Peter, Chagaev and ancient versions of Botha, Rahman and Mercer are being used as examples of his better wins you realise you're really scraping the barrel. On the flipside there is Sanders, Brewster and Purrity who have to rank as the three worst wins for any long standing heavyweight champion.

The new guys coming through aren't any better, Fury and Chisora are just garbage while Wilder has a record that makes Michael Grant look like a world beater.

The Terror of Tylorstown wrote:He could well improve those records but when your best opponent is David Haye it doesn't really mean a lot and when Ibragimov, Peter, Chagaev and ancient versions of Botha, Rahman and Mercer are being used as examples of his better wins you realise you're really scraping the barrel. On the flipside there is Sanders, Brewster and Purrity who have to rank as the three worst wins for any long standing heavyweight champion.

The new guys coming through aren't any better, Fury and Chisora are just garbage while Wilder has a record that makes Michael Grant look like a world beater.

I think you are confusing the debate. It is about longevity against the quality of Bowe's wins.

Klitschko has been ultra dominant for 10 years and will break the record for most defences etc

It is not a debate about whether Bowe or klitschko's record of opposition is better.

I'm not confusing the debate at all just emphasising that longevity is only really used when level of opposition is really poor. The fact that Bowe spanks Wlad with ease as well as having far more significant wins makes it's an easy decision. Longevity for me only means something if you're consistently fighting good fighters.

The Terror of Tylorstown wrote:I'm not confusing the debate at all just emphasising that longevity is only really used when level of opposition is really poor. The fact that Bowe spanks Wlad with ease as well as having far more significant wins makes it's an easy decision. Longevity for me only means something if you're consistently fighting good fighters.

that is a subjective view and who wins wlad v bowe will change depending on which fan you talk to. It is not a fact who wins and is purely hypothetical so cannot be used in an argument of who s better.

Wlad has consistently fought good opponents, he has beten nearly 10 undefeated fighters including world champions in unified matches.

But anyway the point is that longevity at the top beating all mandatories and all top rated opponents in my view means wlad is going to be highter in the rankings in the hof.

You are purely stating statistics which mean absolutely nothing and how a potential head to head would pan out is quite important, the fact Bowe is better in each and every way helps his case. It is subjective but my opinion that Bowe would have beaten him has nothing to do with me being a fan of one or the other as I dislike the pair of them equally but appreciate the skills that Bowe had.

If you consider the likes of Chagaev, Peter and Ibragimov as good opponents then your bar is set very low indeed.

Bowe only had 2 successful defences of the ibf and wba belt before losing them and never winning them back again. His title reign lasted less that ONE year.

he did become WBO champ later on but his defences were controversial. He beat Herbie Hide but hide looked like he was not all there and then Bower got outclassed by Golota twice but won due to golota being crazy and deciding to just low blow Bowe.

Bowe against klitschko is really a debate about longevity against better quality opposition. Bowe beat better fighters but his reign at the top was so short, less than a year.

Klitschkoo may not have beaten someone as good as Holyfield in his prime but being at the top for 10 years and defending his titles the 3rd most in boxing HW history means he will be higher in the hof.

The Terror of Tylorstown wrote:You are purely stating statistics which mean absolutely nothing and how a potential head to head would pan out is quite important, the fact Bowe is better in each and every way helps his case. It is subjective but my opinion that Bowe would have beaten him has nothing to do with me being a fan of one or the other as I dislike the pair of them equally but appreciate the skills that Bowe had.

If you consider the likes of Chagaev, Peter and Ibragimov as good opponents then your bar is set very low indeed.

Peter was the unbeaten HW champ with 25 victories and 22 Ko's when Klitschko beat him.

Chagaev was also an unbeaten HW champion and it was a unification fight.

Ibragimov was also an unbeaten HW champ and it too was a unification fight.

David Haye was wba world champion and it was a unification fight.


Also it is your own subjective view that bowe beats klitschko. You cannot use that in an argument because I could turn around and say Klitschko wins and beats Bowe, they never got in the ring and fought so we cannot say who wll win. Just pointless really.

Debate facts rather than hypothetical situations.

You keep saying the third most failing to recognise that his first 7 'world title' fights were for the then fringe WBO title, there was the small matter of a certain Lennox Lewis being the heavyweight king the whole of that period. So how significant are those victories not very when you're not the divisions king.

What would you be basing your theory of Wladimir beating Bowe on? It's about looking at their skillsets and how they mesh together rather than just having a favourite.

I couldn't care less if Peter, Chagaev and Ibragimov were unbeaten it doesn't suddenly make them any better than average, were any other champion to have beaten them it would pale into insignificance but for Wlad it's a high point.

The Terror of Tylorstown wrote:What would you be basing your theory of Wladimir beating Bowe on? It's about looking at their skillsets and how they mesh together rather than just having a favourite.

I couldn't care less if Peter, Chagaev and Ibragimov were unbeaten it doesn't suddenly make them any better than average, were any other champion to have beaten them it would pale into insignificance but for Wlad it's a high point.

So which Bowe victories were so much better than Wlads best victories that we should totally ignore wlads dominance of the HW division for the last 10 years and put Bowe higher in the hof records.

Remember Bowe was only world Champ for about 11 months in his whole career defending it only 2 times against dokes and ferguson before losing it (excluding his wbo reign which you don't recognise as you rubbished wlads wbo reign) so his victories have to be a lot better than Wlads to put him higher considering Wad has been HW champ for nearly 10 years in a row nd is still going strong.

Wlad has longevity, and that is it. His record is full of bums and fringe contenders and he has been stopped three times by opponents Bowe would have murdered. Bowe is better. Even if he only beat Holy, he is better. Wlads record is a joke. I don't care if he stays on the throne for 100 years. You have to beat actual live opponents to be considered a top heavy. When a blown up cruiser called Haye is your best win, you are not worth arguing for.

Seanusarrilius wrote:Wlad has longevity, and that is it. His record is full of bums and fringe contenders and he has been stopped three times by opponents Bowe would have murdered. Bowe is better. Even if he only beat Holy,  he is better. Wlads record is a joke. I don't care if he stays on the throne for 100 years. You have to beat actual live opponents to be considered a top heavy. When a blown up cruiser called Haye is your best win, you are not worth arguing for.

Isn't Bowe's best win a blown up cruiser called Holyfield?
haye weighed 212 pounds against klitschko.
Holyfield weighed 205 pounds against Bowe.

I actually think Wlad's best win is Calvin Brock.. Brck was undefeated with 25 Ko's from 30 fights and the performance Wlad put on was a masterclass. Best Wlad performane I have ever seen.

Are you pretty much copying and pasting boxrec because all you seem to do is blabber on about records and numbers ad nauseum.

The difference being the name of that former cruiserweight, Haye and Holyfield are worlds apart and just to show I can use boxrec too, Bowe holds wins over Hide, Donald, Dokes, Coetzer, Seldon, Tillery, Biggs, Cooper, Thomas all of them comparable to Wlads best wins. With a stronger talent pool throughout the 80's and 90's these are men who weren't often afforded easy challenges for world titles they had to beat Holyfield, Holmes and Tyson for the best part of their careers.

The Terror of Tylorstown wrote:Are you pretty much copying and pasting boxrec because all you seem to do is blabber on about records and numbers ad nauseum.

The difference being the name of that former cruiserweight, Haye and Holyfield are worlds apart and just to show I can use boxrec too, Bowe holds wins over Hide, Donald, Dokes, Coetzer, Seldon, Tillery, Biggs, Cooper, Thomas all of them comparable to Wlads best wins. With a stronger talent pool throughout the 80's and 90's these are men who weren't often afforded easy challenges for world titles they had to beat Holyfield, Holmes and Tyson for the best part of their careers.

So you are saying wins over Coetzer, Seldon and Tillery mean that we should ignore Klitschkos dominance because of those great names that Bower beat?

lets be honest, Bowes best wins (top 5) are only slighlty better than Klitschkos and the fact he had no dominance whatsoever really means he is lower in the hof

And his best wins are only slighty better because of the win over Holyfield and Golota (even if it was controversial it still counts as a win).

All of bowe's other best wins are on the same level as haye, Ibragmov, Chagaev and Peters.