Will we finally see some respect for Wlad?

First off the bat apologies for posting another article about the weekend's fight, but I don't think this subject has been covered before but if it has feel free to merge this. However have been reading the reactions to the fight and whilst there is an understandable negativity towards Haye's performance, few if any people have gone the next step and actually giving Wlad some credit, which seems something of a theme throughout his career.

Now, don't get me wrong am not arguing he is an all time great or is a guy I would go out of my way to watch but the guy is seven years unbeaten and in Haye has fought and beat, at a canter I might add a guy who was allegedly the biggest challenge out there and who bought gifts Wlad had not encountered in an age and would potentially see an end to his reign, surely thye fact that this not only didn't happen speaks well of Wlad's performance but alas it appears it is all down to what Haye didn't do rather than what Wlad did. Got to be honest does seem a little harsh to me because watching Saturday night I was impressed by how well disciplined, drilled and conditioned Wlad was as he racked up yet another defence by barely losing a round.

Does anyone think it is about time we started to show Wlad a little more respect as for me it is high time we seperated an assessment of hwo good he is to watch from how good he is because they are not the same thing and on the latter he is IMO perhaps a little better than we give him credit for.

Yeah I think it is clear to see he is obviously a top class heavyweight, with a fearsome physical presence to boot. Unfortunately for him, people tend to take style into account when talking about ATG status, and this could count against him.

Was very impressed with his conditioning, judgement of distance, and footwork, but I do wish he would do more than just throw a constant jab with 4 or 5 right hands per fight to back that up. It is very effective, in that it allows him to dominate fights without leaving himself open, but it will always leave an asterisk against his name, as he has never proven that he has the skills that many other top heavies have had.

Well I am a big fan already so I have always given him credit. Those who find him boring will never change their minds because they find him, well, boring.

It annoys how all of a sudden Haye lost the fight, Klitschko didn't win it. Haye was so poor because Wlad dominated him and dominated the tactical battle. He didn't allow Haye to do anything. How the hell can Haye ask for a rematch, he didn't win a round!? Well not convincingly anyway. Haye should move into politics, he's a master of spin.

It makes me question his punch, he had a shaky-chinned former cruiser whom he outweighed by 30lbs barely throwing a punch infront of him and couldn't make a dent. He certainly has plenty of ability outbox certain opponents but a lack of ability to put a live fighter down, and this is the most agressive Wladimir we've ever seen, desperate to knock Haye out.

Both fighters when down a notch in my eyes, Haye much more so but Wlad was lacking too.

Jeff, I think a few of us have given Wlad a bit of credit on one of the earlier threads. I don't remember which one it was though.

In short though, I agree with what you are saying to an extent. He looked a man in total control of his game on Saturday and absolutely knows his limitations, and fights within them. It just so happens that this makes him too good for the rest of the crowd, albeit a weak crowd. Would add the caveat that Haye had talked a great game, but actually achieved limited success at HW when his record is really scrutinised and this has to be taken into account when viewing the fight.

But, even saying this, Wlad, despite been boring, has turned into a very capable and honourable champion who should be appluded for such. He is never going to be viewed in good light on a head to head basis because of the lingering doubts about his chin, but he is much better than people give him credit for.

We often say the same about Lewis, in a much as we seperate his career to pre/post Manny Steward, and, the same can be applied to Wlad. He has made himself, with the help of a very good trainer, into a very capable fighter who knows his game inside out.

3rd and 12th were certainly Haye's, Sugar. The fight was jam packed with very close rounds, which obviously go to Wlad through greater workrate/it being Wlad.

John Bloody Wayne wrote:It makes me question his punch, he had a shaky-chinned former cruiser whom he outweighed by 30lbs barely throwing a punch infront of him and couldn't make a dent. He certainly has plenty of ability outbox certain opponents but a lack of ability to put a live fighter down, and this is the most agressive Wladimir we've ever seen, desperate to knock Haye out.

Both fighters when down a notch in my eyes, Haye much more so but Wlad was lacking too.

He connected properly only a couple of times, but even then Haye was leaning away and riding the punch. If he'd caught Haye coming in I think it would be lights out. As Wlad said, Haye was very cautious. Haye caught Wlad flush a couple of times, especially in the 11th I think it was - had little affect. He certainly didn't fold as Haye thought he would. Maybe it's Haye's punch at heavyweight we should be questioning?

Fists of Fury wrote:3rd and 12th were certainly Haye's, Sugar. The fight was jam packed with very close rounds, which obviously go to Wlad through greater workrate/it being Wlad.

Maybe, but the Klitschko won the others clearly in my eyes.

Wlad's a fine one to call anyone cautious though. I think both guys knew they had to avoid taking anything massive flush.

SugarRayBray wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:3rd and 12th were certainly Haye's, Sugar. The fight was jam packed with very close rounds, which obviously go to Wlad through greater workrate/it being Wlad.

Maybe, but the Klitschko won the others clearly in my eyes.

Yeah in terms of output they would have to have gone to Wlad. In terms of clean punches however it was very difficult to split the two.

Ive always thought Wlad was good to be honest. He has a genuine quality jab, quality footwork for his size and is an expert at controlling range. Outside of that he doesnt bring a huge amount but he simply doesnt need to. What I noticed in the (3 year) build up to this fight was how obsessed so many were with what Wlad lacks - chin, agression, excitement, punch variety etc etc far more than concentrating on what he did well. Hes one dimensional and fairly boring but its extremelly difficult to beat. Frankly who cares if he never throws an uppercut? its largely irrelevant when hes cruising through every round.

Seems the initial reaction, especially in America, has been far more focused on Hayes performance, or lack of it, than on Wlads. On some sites they have even given him Audley Harrison like status as a complete chancer.

I think its tough for David because this was literally his defining fight and te loss has overshadowed everything else. His reputation is almost ruined which I dont like to see, even though part of the blame lies with his own mouth.

I would like to see him beat a few ranked contenders, especially American ones like Chambers and Arreola over in the States at least to show he wasnt some complete joke like Audley Harrison and its was just a case of being stuck in the same era as the Klitschkos rather than him being rubbish. I can understand if he couldnt be bothered though as his motivation and confidence must be low after Saturday.

If he retires now unfortunately I can see the history books being very unkind to him judging on the initial reactions I have read. Would expect to be seeing him pop up on "top ten worst heavyweight champions of all time" lists more than "top ten best cruiserweight" lists which I dont think he deserves overall.

Good article, Jeff, and you're bang on, too; it's about time Wladimir started getting at least some recognition and respect.

Like you, I have no desire to honour him as an all-time great, but you can't be anything other than respectful of the fact that he has, yet again, taken care of another 'biggest challenge he's ever faced' and, in the process, taken another portion of the title. The fact that he's unified his old IBF strap with those of the WBO and the WBA show that he's faced the best out there on a consistent basis, with the obvious (though understandable) exception of his brother.

It's a cliché to end all clichés, but you can only fight who's around at the time. I was arguing the other day that I'd certainly rank Wladimir ahead of someone such as Bowe in the all-time Heavyweight stakes, and I stick by that. He may not be one of the best fighters to grace the Heavyweight divisions but he's certainly been a very dominant 'champion' of it over the last few years and, despite his limitations, has developed in to a very difficult man to beat. A fine fighter (not a great one), and he should be remembered as such.

Don't think it's reasonable to question Wlad's punch at this stage. It been shown on more than enough occasions that he has a murderous punch. As SRB noted above Haye was rolling with the shots that Wlad did catch Haye with.
There's alot to like about Wlad, he's a tremendous athlete, good boxer and a proper person (which cannot be said of some).
It is difficult watching him at times because you know what he's capable of and how much he rations that right hand of his.
I think people are unfair on him and his brother for a number of reasons. One of which being their style of movement. You just can't expect guys that size to move like the smaller heavyweights of the past just like you can't expect a heavyweight to move like a middle and so on.
Regarding Saturday night I don't really understand this rush to have a go at Wlad. I've been much more annoyed by some of his performances of the past. It was certainly nothing like as bad as the Ibragimov fight. I was happy enough with what I got for my money as I have expected it to be over in a few rounds.
For me, that fight removed alot of doubt about Wlad's quality and showed he had genuinely improved over the years.

BALTIMORA wrote:Wlad's a fine one to call anyone cautious though. I think both guys knew they had to avoid taking anything massive flush.

I agree Balti but why would/should Wlad be anything but cautious. He has developed a style that quite simply works. It makes the most of his attributes whilst not exposing his limitations and he knows that this is effective for him. He was/is the proven operator at HW and didn't need to do anything exceptional to win the fight. How much that is down to his effectiveness and Hayes's tactics is up for debate but it was a consumate performance to my eyes.

Would anyone give wlad a place in a heavyweight all time top 20? I'd say he deserves serious consideration.

Sugar Boy Sweetie wrote:Would anyone give wlad a place in a heavyweight all time top 20? I'd say he deserves serious consideration.

I probably would SBS. Haven't put one together for a while and, as always, it depends on the criteria used to select it, but I think I would find a place for him or least, as you quite rightly say, he deserves consideration.

Sugar Boy Sweetie wrote:Would anyone give wlad a place in a heavyweight all time top 20? I'd say he deserves serious consideration.

Was thinking about this earlier today actually, Sugar Boy. I agree that he is worthy of consideration, although I'd probably have him just outside of that company for the time being. Somewhere around the twenty-five mark seems about right, though I wouldn't really dispute anyone having him a bit higher. He has two strikes against him; first, the relatively average nature of the division which he's cleaned up in, and secondly, the fact that he's not fought his brother means that he (or Vitali, for that matter) can never be fully identified as THE dominant Heavyweight of his time.

As I say, all in all I think he's worth consideration, but he's not quite top twenty for me, personally, though at the same time he's not a million miles off.

Fists of Fury wrote:3rd and 12th were certainly Haye's, Sugar. The fight was jam packed with very close rounds, which obviously go to Wlad through greater workrate/it being Wlad.

Haye landed 2 half decent punches in the 3rd. Wlad won the round and landed more.

Haye is an embarrasment, this fight is in the Audley Harrison bracket of letting the occassion get the better of him.

All Hayes talk of Wlad cheating and then he goes out hell bent on getting points deducted. Tom Daly would have been proud of some of those dives.

If anything both fighters have gone down in my estimation and for the life of me can't imagine any of the top heavyweights letting Haye see the final bell like Wlad did. He's got a decent enough jab but even then against the smaller heavyweights like Frazier, Dempsey or Marciano can't see him having the power to gain their respect at which they all charge him down, as soon as they land it's fight over.

Bordering on the top 20 but would be ahead of some fighters I feel would beat him like Norton or Bowe

i think Wlad deserves a fair assessment but not because of this fight, this fight showed Hayes limitations not anything new about Wladimir, but yes, he is a very good heavyweight because he has great attributes and knows how to use them, doesnt change the fact he would of been smashed y Lewis, Tyson, et al because they would of found a way to his chin and when wobbled Wlad gets knocked out, but he is a very good heabyweight and i dont blame him one iota for being a little boring, he fights to win and gives himself the best chance by not being wreckless,

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:3rd and 12th were certainly Haye's, Sugar. The fight was jam packed with very close rounds, which obviously go to Wlad through greater workrate/it being Wlad.

Haye landed 2 half decent punches in the 3rd. Wlad won the round and landed more.

Haye is an embarrasment, this fight is in the Audley Harrison bracket of letting the occassion get the better of him.

All Hayes talk of Wlad cheating and then he goes out hell bent on getting points deducted. Tom Daly would have been proud of some of those dives.

Is that even worth a response? Ok, it was NOTHING like the Harrison fight. The occasion didn't get to him, he tried what he thought would work, what did get to him however was the sheer size of Wladimir, and it dawned upon Haye during the fight that getting to the chin was going to be much harder than he envisaged.

You're better than that mate, that is the type of post I'd expect from a casual football fan that happened to tune in to both fights.

Fists of Fury wrote:Yeah I think it is clear to see he is obviously a top class heavyweight, with a fearsome physical presence to boot. Unfortunately for him, people tend to take style into account when talking about ATG status, and this could count against him.

I have the same view that Fists' discusses. I don't dislike the guy personally and think he is a good boxer.....but his style is coma inducing to watch so i'll never be a fan.

Any respect for Wlad must be tempered by the fact that he has spent his entire career avoiding the only other top quality heavyweight of the era.

Fists of Fury wrote:3rd and 12th were certainly Haye's, Sugar. The fight was jam packed with very close rounds, which obviously go to Wlad through greater workrate/it being Wlad.

Now I know you're a Haye fanatic with a poster of David on your bedroom wall, calling it a close fight now, lol, what planet are you on and did you actually watch the fight, next you'll be saying that if it had been held in London Haye would have definitely won it and the fight was a fix and Haye was forced to dance around and not throw any punches because both his arms were actually broken in training but he still wanted to fight because he'd already dodged one fight with Wlad because he actually injured his back in training.....Fists you're an absolute joker....

Imperial Ghosty wrote:If anything both fighters have gone down in my estimation and for the life of me can't imagine any of the top heavyweights letting Haye see the final bell like Wlad did. He's got a decent enough jab but even then against the smaller heavyweights like Frazier, Dempsey or Marciano can't see him having the power to gain their respect at which they all charge him down, as soon as they land it's fight over.

Bordering on the top 20 but would be ahead of some fighters I feel would beat him like Norton or Bowe

I think this is the point Ghosty. On a head to head basis, Wlad doesn't make a top 20, but taking all the other criteria into account then he has a chance. He would be above alot of guys who I would pick to beat him, but I guess you can't just have an all time top 10, 20, 30 or whatever based purely on head to head fights.

In that case, Hide is a nailed on top 5!

Its not based purely on head to heads but his best win is arguably now Haye which simply isn't good enough to be considered for a top 20 place regardless of longevity you still need top class wins to back it up

i hear wlad is looking to fight the winner of fury vs chisora.

http://www.sportinglife.com/boxing/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=boxing/11/07/03/BOXING_Klitschko_Nightlead.html&BID=543

i think if he beats the winner of that fight then he will certainly have demanded the respect of the uk, beating our best twice in a row. i don't think the USA will have changed there opinion, as it wasn't an exciting fight- although i have to admit haye was equally guilty as wlad for making the fight how it was.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Its not based purely on head to heads but his best win is arguably now Haye which simply isn't good enough to be considered for a top 20 place regardless of longevity you still need top class wins to back it up

He will always be a contentious fighter to rank, that much is a given, and he will suffer as his era is bereft of real genuine challenges, and the fact he won't face his brother who would obviously be such a challenge. He does, however, deserve immense credit for holding 3 of the 4 "major" belts and making numerous defences. His problem remains the fact the division is weak right now.

Boxing fans have complained for years that a unified HW champion would be good for the sport.......at least we now have one. Well a unified family anyway.

lightsout wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:3rd and 12th were certainly Haye's, Sugar. The fight was jam packed with very close rounds, which obviously go to Wlad through greater workrate/it being Wlad.

Now I know you're a Haye fanatic with a poster of David on your bedroom wall, calling it a close fight now, lol, what planet are you on and did you actually watch the fight, next you'll be saying that if it had been held in London Haye would have definitely won it and the fight was a fix and Haye was forced to dance around and not throw any punches because both his arms were actually broken in training but he still wanted to fight because he'd already dodged one fight with Wlad because he actually injured his back in training.....Fists you're an absolute joker....

I have given Haye 2 rounds...can you not read properly, or are your biceps covering your eyes?

The fact is that there were plenty of close rounds, whereby no real clean punches were landed, but Wlad deserved to be given the nod in these rounds due to connecting more (albeit with glancing blows). Quite what is a joke about that I'd like to know, so toddle off and talk about something you have a clue about, please.

Wladimir is a good guy, I've always enjoyed listening to him talk, he does quite a few interviews on internet radio.

I have been told he has just become the 4th man in the history of the HW division to string together 10 title defenses in a row. The other 3 guys are Joe Louis, Muhammad Ali and Larry Holmes. (This needs to be verified).


I like the guy and he has been dominant but I have to state the obvious and say he would not have amassed 10 defenses in the 6 decades that preceded his dominance.

I really think Wlad can be beaten. He does have flaws. The biggest one is he doesn't like fighting and has developed a style where he rarely has to actually fight. He really did not like it whenever Haye had the odd bit of success and while he threw punches back in the heat of the moment he showed signs of nerves and extra cautiousness after being hit.

Wlad's style is all built around his height and athleticism for a big man. I'd like to see how effective Wlad's style would be fighting someone of equal height and weight.

HW boxing needs a skilled fighter that is strong, can move and is able to clock up a good punch rate. I looked at the Floyd Patterson v Sonny Liston fight recently and the number of punches thrown and their speed puts the current era to shame. Liston's jab is a beautiful punch thrown with meaning.

Listening to David Haye you would think we were going to see the reincarnation of Muhammad Ali stepping into the ring. Look at boxing from the 70's, 80's and 90's and it's in a different league and its so quick.

Congrats to Wlad I'm very happy for him as he's a decent man but I a not ready to concede that he is anything other than a very big, athletic, basic fighter. He hasn't got anyone on his CV. Louis gets criticism for this but just hold the two records up against each other to see how bad HW boxing has been in the 21st century.

Strongback wrote:Wladimir is a good guy, I've always enjoyed listening to him talk, he does quite a few interviews on internet radio.

I have been told he has just become the 4th man in the history of the HW division to string together 10 title defenses in a row. The other 3 guys are Joe Louis, Muhammad Ali and Larry Holmes. (This needs to be verified).

Tommy Burns, who I think is one of the most underrated Heavyweights of all time, actually made eleven successful defences of the undisputed title, too. Nevertheless, Wladimir is in impressive company having reached double figures.

Strongback when people talk about Wlads jab they talk it up far too much, Liston had a great piston like jab that makes Wlads look pityful in comparison

88Chris05 wrote:

Strongback wrote:Wladimir is a good guy, I've always enjoyed listening to him talk, he does quite a few interviews on internet radio.

I have been told he has just become the 4th man in the history of the HW division to string together 10 title defenses in a row. The other 3 guys are Joe Louis, Muhammad Ali and Larry Holmes. (This needs to be verified).

Tommy Burns, who I think is one of the most underrated Heavyweights of all time, actually made eleven successful defences of the undisputed title, too. Nevertheless, Wladimir is in impressive company having reached double figures.

Thanks for that Chris.

I had a sneaking suspicion there might be more who had reached 10 but I wasn't sure.

Fists of Fury, its been nice to read your level headed view in a number of threads on the fight compared to the manic displays by many others.

I don't think it was as one sided as many are suggesting or the pasting that most seem to be taking the scorecards to suggest. Both fighters were very cautious and a lot of the rounds involved little action other than Wlad's jab (or the annoying way he moves it up and down like a lever), I thought at times Haye landed the cleaner work in some rounds. Yet it was hard to give him the round for a few punches negated against Wlad's pressure and jab, even when it wasn't really connecting.

Exactly mate, it reminds me a tad of the aftermath of Hamed's loss to Barrera. Suddenly Hamed had been 'destroyed', been 'exposed' and 'brutally beaten', whereas in reality he lost a relatively wide decision but was never out of his depth.

You sum it up well in that post, and I am in full agreement.

Sugar Boy

Think like most I would have Wlad outside the top fifteen but if we look at who the IBRO have in the last five places in their 20 it is as follows

16.Jersey Joe Walcott
17.Ezzard Charles
18.Harry Wills
19.James J. Corbett
20.Bob Fitzsimmons

To be fair you can make a pretty decent argument for him replacing any of those guys, particularly Fitz and Charles who it would have to be said probably sneak in on P4P basis rather than a body of work at heavy because at heavy exclusively they are a little patchy. Not sure I'd have him top 20 but the idea is certainly not out of leftfield

Not given him much respect in the past..but I'll give credit..

He was the one with the heart, class and will to win.......

A good heavy in a poor age who has distinguished himself and held the title of champion with honor...

Always respected the sport...

A good role model and all the best for the future..

Always respected him but found it hard to guage him due to the quality of the people he has fought.

Found his style very dull to watch though so never have been able to get excited about him and discuss him with enthusiasm.

i was going to do a similar article jeff. but opposite conclusion.

i dont think he deserves to much credit as the guy facing him did nothing to challege him. hence such backlash about hayes performance. i think in todays current heavyweights we are to used to the plodders. wlad used a small amount of footwork and everyone was amazed. all he did was back off haye to keep out of range then step back in behind his jab, hardly ali now was it. but just that simple trick was enough to bamboozle haye.

in general i was more disappointed with haye than impressed with wlad, wlad did exactly what i thought he would. good jab and one of the few heavys around who actually move there feet. one of the problems with the big upcoming british heavys is that they too are plodders and too easy to hit. match wlad against any old time heavy who could use is feet and ring smarts and he struggles. just very lucky that there arent many around to do it anymore.

his style is simple but effective and his defence has improved from early on in his career. but you put that same defence on a smaller fighter and it soon gets found out. i know its a if my aunt had balls shes be my uncle but everything wlad does well is all because of his size. the greatest heavyweights could probably argue that they were around the p4p top ten best in there time, wlad makes no where near a p4p list today because he simply beats people because he's bigger

i would also like to add that he's not even the best of his generation. his brother beats him for me most of the time and early on in his career there was lewis. so for me he's number 3 in one of the worst generations of heavyweight boxing. thats not worth top 20 for me

Compelling and rich, that was an interesting post and you argue your points well. However, to argue that Wladimir only wins because of his size does him a disservice, I feel. Blow Haye up to 6'7" and 245 lb, or scale Wladimir down to 6'3" and 210 lb, and I'm convinced he'd still have won on saturday night.

I actually said above that top twenty is maybe a stretch too far for Wladimir, but based on accomplishments he must be close. We can point out that it's a very average era for the Heavyweights (I'd agree) and that Klitschko is limited when compared to some of those who have gone before - but why, then, have those 'more talented' Heavyweights not managed to equal Wladimir's feats, depsite having ample opportunity and the circumstances to do so?

I think he's somewhere between twenty-first and twenty-fifth as it stands right now, but if someone had a real argument for him to make the very low end of a top twenty, I'd listen.

Fists...you're diluded.... the rounds in the main were not close .... the stats had Wlad way ahead on punches landed....yep you're a Haye fan....stop whining on.... and stop trying to come up with a view on the fight which somehow evens things up, the pro's all had Haye losing by a big margin and describing his performance as woeful/poor/not worthy of his buildup...... this man's peformance was embarassing....

chris:

scale wlad down and it meant that he wouldnt have had the safety behind the jab. while jabbing he would still be in the danger zone of haye. i wouldnt argue to much with him still beating him because haye was pretty awful but it certainly would be alot closer if he didnt have the safety of his pawing jab.

to answer the question "but why, then, have those 'more talented' Heavyweights not managed to equal Wladimir's feats, depsite having ample opportunity and the circumstances to do so? "

is pretty much the era in which he has fought in. look at his cv its not the best, the only great fighters during the same era are his brother, lewis and holyfield all of which he hasnt fought. people like calzghe get critised then so should wlad. whats his best win? haye? a five fight novice at the weight who didnt perfom very well on the night (whether or not wlad let him is another arguement) no one on his cv is a great he could have fought a old tyson if he wanted but steared clear.

I think he could well be in the top 20 heavies. Its not actually that easy to find 20 heavies with a stronger claim. If the likes of Fitzsimmons, Tunney, Walcott etc are up there then I think Wlad has a better claim in pure heavyweight sense based on divisional acheivement and longetivity.

Difficult to say how he fares on head to head terms. For me he beats alot of the smaller sub 200lb heavyweights champions. Marciano, Fitzsimmons, Corbett etc

Noo no no no, Marciano encountered more skillful fighters than Wlad and completely negated their jabs by disregarding it as if it wasn't there, he doesn't have the power to gain the rocks respect and would get walked down with relative ease. For me Fitzsimmons ranks higher as wins over Corbett, Sharkey, Maher and Ruhlin are more impressive than anything Wlad can claim to have.

compelling and rich wrote:to answer the question "but why, then, have those 'more talented' Heavyweights not managed to equal Wladimir's feats, depsite having ample opportunity and the circumstances to do so? "

is pretty much the era in which he has fought in.

While I agree that this Heavyweight era is far from a great one, I also think it only tells half the story. We always hear how much more talented the likes of Witherspoon, Thomas etc were than Wladimir, and yet they couldn't even muster a third of the title defences that Wladimir has managed in those dark few Heavyweight years of, say, 1983 to 1986, between Holmes visibly being on the slide and Tyson emerging. We hear how misunderstood and underrated some of the 'Depression' Era Heavyweights between Dempsey / Tunney and Louis were, and yet at the same time, none of them were able to mould themselves in to a long-serving title holder, either.

As I say, his limitations and the era he's fighing in mean he'll never be a top fifteen candidate, but let's not be too hasty in rubbishing his top twenty claims, should he score two or three more significant wins before now and the end of his career.

I honestly dont see how anyone could make Marciano favourite over Klitschko. Hes tailor made for him I think. Far too small and not skillfull enough. As tough as he was, I cant see him walking through Klitschkos jab for any extended length of time.

Even if you rate Fitzsimmons wins as better, his relative short stint as champion hurts his claim. Tunney has better wins at heavyweight also, but again almost no longetivity.

Size isn't really an issue for a fighter like Marciano who would disregard Wlads jab who lest we forget isn't the same calibrE of fighter as an ageing Louis, Charles or Walcott. Wlad relies on his opponent respecting his power which was his downfall against Brewster and Sanders who did not, as shown by Haye Wlads jab isn't as ramrod as it's made out to be, his reach was the deciding factor against an opponent weary of his right hand which landed a few times to no effect.

Fitzsimmons reign as champion may have been short but he beat good enough fighters before and after to make up for it, all Wlad has is longevity

he has no career defining win to speak of and barely a top fifty fighter on his cv . in an era where he could of fought lewis, tyson, holyfield he hasnt fought any. all could have been possiabiltys at some point even if they were all past it. such cherry picking shouldnt be applauded. i do struggle past 20 fighters to name better than wlad. just think he's very lucky. you put him in any other era and were not having this conversation. bang him in the mix in the 70's and nobody would know who he was (well maybe some would recall him as the person foreman decapitated)

88Chris05 wrote:

compelling and rich wrote:to answer the question "but why, then, have those 'more talented' Heavyweights not managed to equal Wladimir's feats, depsite having ample opportunity and the circumstances to do so? "

is pretty much the era in which he has fought in.

While I agree that this Heavyweight era is far from a great one, I also think it only tells half the story. We always hear how much more talented the likes of Witherspoon, Thomas etc were than Wladimir, and yet they couldn't even muster a third of the title defences that Wladimir has managed in those dark few Heavyweight years of, say, 1983 to 1986, between Holmes visibly being on the slide and Tyson emerging. We hear how misunderstood and underrated some of the 'Depression' Era Heavyweights between Dempsey / Tunney and Louis were, and yet at the same time, none of them were able to mould themselves in to a long-serving title holder, either.

As I say, his limitations and the era he's fighing in mean he'll never be a top fifteen candidate, but let's not be too hasty in rubbishing his top twenty claims, should he score two or three more significant wins before now and the end of his career.

One thing to say Chris: VITALI KLITSCHKO, the 80's lot had to face eachother and because there wasn't a clear gap at the top they swapped the titles all the time, now change Wlads surname and the chances are he has to face Vitali at which point he probably loses and never has the chance of racking up as many defences.