W.Klitschko's legacy

First topic message reminder :

In 20 years time how would he looked back on????


And besides his technical style, is it just me that gives him a chance against great heavyweights from previous eras????

man sausage

Seanusarrilius wrote:Subjective haha true rowley, very true mate

Does this mean I can get back to the more important business of explaining to Waingro why Lewis ducked Ruiz?

Or how he's hispanic.

Scottrf wrote:Or how he's hispanic.

Who Lewis? He's Candian Scott, try and keep up.

What was his Jamaican accent about then?

No, have patience and wait for his next golden nugget of stupidity and go after that!

Scottrf wrote:What was his Jamaican accent about then?

Does that make Steve Mclaren Dutch then?

rowley wrote:

Scottrf wrote:What was his Jamaican accent about then?

Does that make Steve Mclaren Dutch then?

He is, how you say, speak real good English.

Scottrf wrote:

rowley wrote:

Scottrf wrote:What was his Jamaican accent about then?

Does that make Steve Mclaren Dutch then?

He is, how you say, speak real good English.

Seen a couple of those interviews with him in Holland, brilliant.

Thanks guys, this is my first thread on 606v2 to get 100+ replies

I'm with Sean on this, Wlad doesn't have a legacy because he's not beaten anyone much like Pedroza and Hamed get overlooked as elite featherweights because despite having good records they aren't quite great, with Wlad can you honestly say he even has a good record?

Much gets said about you know whos heavyweight reign but at least he was beating all time great fighters with a history at the weight.

Something which I believe is sometimes overlooked is the sheer professionalism of both Klitschkos.

I don't suppose anybody would claim that they are richly talented or versatile, but each is a shining example of the ability to maximise and capitalise upon the gifts he was given. What they do, they do exceptionally well and consistently well.

We should ask ourselves, in my opinion, how many heavyweight champions have ever dominated their opponents so thoroughly and comprehensively as the brothers. We can point to a weak division, of course, but it still remained for the brothers to do their jobs and we must, at the very least, accept that neither of them has dropped too many rounds and each of them has a healthy KO ratio.

Does anybody match either of them in this regard ?

James J Jeffries is up there with Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, etc., as being among the dominant heavyweight champions in history, yet he didn't always dominate his opponents, overall. Corbett and Fitzsimmons each outboxed him for long periods, for example. Even Louis, regarded as a model of consistency, had a few shaky moments during his reign, and Ali fiddled his way infuriatingly through some of his defences, looking decidely ordinary against Mildenberger, for example.

Talent, alone, doesn't always cut it. We need only consider the early thirties, when Schmeling, Sharkey and Baer were playing pass the parcel with the heavyweight crown. Each of them was, in his own way, richly talented and each, on a given night, would be a handful for almost anybody. However, and particularly in the cases of Sharkey and Baer, the talent didn't amount to a hill of beans in the greater scheme of things. If Max Baer were going in with either Klitschko he could, on a given night, upend either of them, but the percentage call would surely be a win for the Klitschkos, and especially Vitali.

Professionalism and dedication must count for something, in my opinion. Carmen Basilio is one of my favourite fighters of all time, largely because he is a monument to bloody - minded dogged determination to make the best of what Nature gave him. I believe we can say the same for both Klitschkos.

Elite heavies ? In my opinion, no. However, the heavyweight division being a bit thin on elite fighters I don't believe it to be beyond the pale that either or both should be knocking at the door of a top twenty.

Jeffries was fighting a far higher calibre level of fighter to either of the brothers which puts into perspective their dominance somewhat, all roads lead back to the fact that it's a very weak era even for the heavyweights, would consider Vitali for a top 20 place but do think that the likes of Wills, Langford, Fitzsimmons and Walcott all deserve a higher placing and they are the men he'd be battling with.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Jeffries was fighting a far higher calibre level of fighter to either of the brothers which puts into perspective their dominance somewhat, all roads lead back to the fact that it's a very weak era even for the heavyweights, would consider Vitali for a top 20 place but do think that the likes of Wills, Langford, Fitzsimmons and Walcott all deserve a higher placing and they are the men he'd be battling with.

Of course he was, Ghosty, and I did concede that the crop of heavies to have represented the Klitschkos' opposition has been a pretty motley crew.

It's their professionalism and consistency which I am highlighting.

Johnson laboured to a draw with Jack O'Brien, was plain awful against Battling Jim Johnson, and flatly refused to defend against the best men of his day.

You know how much I love Dempsey, but Jack had a difficult time of it - at least in the early stages - against Tommy Gibbons.

Louis had the Billy Conn fight, one of the Godoy fights and was all at sea for the briefest of moments against Buddy Baer, first time out.

Ali looked mediocre against Mildenberger and was sometimes pretty uninspired against second tier opposition second time round.

Even Frazier, another dyed - in - the - wool dedicated pro, didn't have everything his own way against Stander before he brutally chopped him down.

Holmes had a couple of lucky scrapes against middle order opponents.

In the interests of objectivity, we need to ask if either Klitschko would have had problems with any of these. I'd venture that Buddy Baer, who was a huge man and hit like a mule, might get lucky against Wlad but, other than that, I can't see either brother dropping too many rounds against this lot.

In all honesty, the Klitschkos have never rocked my boat, but my opinion doesn't mean squat if we are to assess them dispassionately, and I firmly believe that their professionalism and dedication is worthy of respect and a good few ' brownie points ' when we assess their places in history.

All of those men mentioned have one thing in common having to fight better fighters more consistently so there will be a drop off in form from time to time. Were Ali, Frazier, Johnson or Holmes afforded the luxury of fighting the K Bros opposition I don't think they would drop many rounds at all nor would they be losing to the likes of Sanders or Purity.

I wouldn't say that Johnson fought consistently good opposition once he had taken the title. Neither did Ali, first time out. Patterson had a slipped disc ; Cooper and London didn't deserve to be in the same country as Ali, let alone the same ring ; Williams was shot - to - smithereens ; Mildenberger was worthy, but no more. Ali saved his best two defences until last. Magnificent against Terrell, without a doubt, and pretty darned good against Folley ( also past his best, ) but, even then, Folley clocked him with a few pretty good overhand rights along the way and probably took a round or two.

Anybody who makes as many defences as Larry Holmes will, inevitably, fight chequered opposition, so I can't really argue with you there.

Notwithstanding, as somebody who doesn't count himself a fan of either Klitschko, I do have the utmost respect for their professionalism and dedication to always operate to the best of their abilities.

Massive fan of Vitali who I think is unfortunate to be fighting when he is, easily good enough to give almost anyone trouble but feel he would come up short more often than not but just can't get away from the fact that Wladimir is lucky that the best around happens to be his brother.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Massive fan of Vitali who I think is unfortunate to be fighting when he is, easily good enough to give almost anyone trouble but feel he would come up short more often than not but just can't get away from the fact that Wladimir is lucky that the best around happens to be his brother.

Again, I wouldn't argue. Anything which I have written here presupposes that we accept and embrace the fragmentation of the heavyweight title. Being old - fashioned, I despise that situation but, as I said before, my preferences and opinions don't mean squat if we are to be impartial and objective. Wlad has done what he had to do, whether we like it or not.

Windy can we get the swear filter sorted please because it's stupid that the name of a very famous middleweight with the surname Tiger appears so stupidly?

Funnily enough, we were discussing that a day or two ago, Ghosty. When the rest of the team are here ( probably Monday, ) I'll bring it up again.

I would not place Wlad in the top 20 of heavyweights ever. Maybe top 30 though.