David Haye top 15 all time Heavyweight?

Will Haye be this if he KOs Wlad this summer? He will according to legendary trainer Angelo Dundee.

http://www.boxingscene.com/dundee-i-look-forward-haye-knocking-klitschko-out--38448


Beating Wlad will make Haye the premier fighter of this era.

I, like Dundee, thinks that Haye will KO Wlad this summer but not sure I would place him in the top 15 ever of Heavyweights, not because he is not talented enough but more to do with he hasn't faced the opposition to prove it.

Where would you put Haye on the all time heavyweight list if he beats Wlad.

No.

If he ko's wlad his heavyweight resume reads: barret, valuev, ruiz, harrison, wlad. 5 fights. Virtually all mediocre or sub mediocre opposition. I like the guy and think he will beat wlad via stoppage, but let's not put him on a ridiculous pedestal. Vitali or even wlad himself have a stronger claim than haye, but they wouldn't cut it either. Angelo Dundee is 90 years old ir thereabouts, his eyesight is probably failing him.

Not a chance, and for the same reasons offered by Sugar Boy.

One sunny day doesn't make a summer.

Considering Tyson, Holy are in the 10-15 section if not lower it makes any case for Haye to be considered in the top 15 most silly.....

Might as well have Buster Douglas in there.....I mean he beat Berbick and Tyson....

Riddick Bowe must be top 5 if Haye is top 15..

Dundee must be losing it.

Sugar Boy Sweetie wrote:No.

If he ko's wlad his heavyweight resume reads: barret, valuev, ruiz, harrison, wlad. 5 fights. Virtually all mediocre or sub mediocre opposition. I like the guy and think he will beat wlad via stoppage, but let's not put him on a ridiculous pedestal. Vitali or even wlad himself have a stronger claim than haye, but they wouldn't cut it either. Angelo Dundee is 90 years old ir thereabouts, his eyesight is probably failing him.

a

I don't see how Wlad could rank higher than him if Haye KOs him. Has Wlad ever has a scalp such as Wlad on his record.

I agree with Dundee that if Haye beats Wlad he becomes the premier heavy of this era. Haye is also blessed with great speed power and a good boxing brain.

I think his lack of a heavyweight career will downgrade his ranking, but I think if it was not for his retirement he could well justify Dundee's claims.

Yeah, course. Right up there between Butterbean and Zippy from Rainbow.

Not a chance D4. He has no quality on his resume, no dominance, no longevity. He will be remembered as the CW that moved up and exposed the paucity of quality in the current HW division by beating the no1 guy. A good achievement but to say it makes him a top 15 atg HW when you look at his HW career is nothing short of ludicrous.

Sugar Boy Sweetie wrote:Not a chance D4. He has no quality on his resume, no dominance, no longevity. He will be remembered as the CW that moved up and exposed the paucity of quality in the current HW division by beating the no1 guy. A good achievement but to say it makes him a top 15 atg HW when you look at his HW career is nothing short of ludicrous.

Like I said it down to his early retirement, but if he were to continue his career for a few more years he could make it on that list IMO.

This era does get a hard time of it, it not the best but by no means the worst, and Fighters such as Wlad Vitali and Haye would prove a tough task for any of the heavies of the past.

Simple answer to the question is no.

The long answer is not a hope in hell. An old Barrett, a diseased Valuev, a semi-retired Ruiz, and Harrison. Bloody Harrison. Yes; Wlad would be a great win. As truss mentioned though - Douglas' whipping of Tyson is greater than this hypothetical victory over Wlad.

oxring wrote:Simple answer to the question is no.

The long answer is not a hope in hell. An old Barrett, a diseased Valuev, a semi-retired Ruiz, and Harrison. Bloody Harrison. Yes; Wlad would be a great win. As truss mentioned though - Douglas' whipping of Tyson is greater than this hypothetical victory over Wlad.

I think maybe Dundee is basing it on perceived skill rather than record. I do think though a lot of people are underrating the victory over Wlad.

D4thincarnation wrote:

Sugar Boy Sweetie wrote:Not a chance D4. He has no quality on his resume, no dominance, no longevity. He will be remembered as the CW that moved up and exposed the paucity of quality in the current HW division by beating the no1 guy. A good achievement but to say it makes him a top 15 atg HW when you look at his HW career is nothing short of ludicrous.

Like I said it down to his early retirement, but if he were to continue his career for a few more years he could make it on that list IMO.

This era does get a hard time of it, it not the best but by no means the worst, and Fighters such as Wlad Vitali and Haye would prove a tough task for any of the heavies of the past.

It does get a hard time and I agree that the 3 fighters you mention would be a tricky nights work for anyone on their night.

But the original issue was haye being a top 15 hw if je beats wlad, to which the clear answer is no as his resume, dominance, longevity etc don't stand up to scrutiny. If he were to beat wlad he'd still have to beat vitali to fully establish himself as the best fighter of the era. If he could follow that up with wins over the likes of povetkin and adamek in 2012 then you'd be talking about a guy who had to be taken seriously at the weight. But none of that is likely to materialise, and even if haye does beat wlad the chances are he'll be regarded as something of a flash in the pan in a bad era. It's not like wlad hasn't been beaten, do his other victors deserve consideration for the top 15? Coz I bet their hw resumes are at least equal to Hayes in terms of quality fought.

Sugar Boy Sweetie wrote:

D4thincarnation wrote:

Sugar Boy Sweetie wrote:Not a chance D4. He has no quality on his resume, no dominance, no longevity. He will be remembered as the CW that moved up and exposed the paucity of quality in the current HW division by beating the no1 guy. A good achievement but to say it makes him a top 15 atg HW when you look at his HW career is nothing short of ludicrous.

Like I said it down to his early retirement, but if he were to continue his career for a few more years he could make it on that list IMO.

This era does get a hard time of it, it not the best but by no means the worst, and Fighters such as Wlad Vitali and Haye would prove a tough task for any of the heavies of the past.

It does get a hard time and I agree that the 3 fighters you mention would be a tricky nights work for anyone on their night.

But the original issue was haye being a top 15 hw if je beats wlad, to which the clear answer is no as his resume, dominance, longevity etc don't stand up to scrutiny. If he were to beat wlad he'd still have to beat vitali to fully establish himself as the best fighter of the era. If he could follow that up with wins over the likes of povetkin and adamek in 2012 then you'd be talking about a guy who had to be taken seriously at the weight. But none of that is likely to materialise, and even if haye does beat wlad the chances are he'll be regarded as something of a flash in the pan in a bad era. It's not like wlad hasn't been beaten, do his other victors deserve consideration for the top 15? Coz I bet their hw resumes are at least equal to Hayes in terms of quality fought.

Yes that was the original question and if you remember I said not for me for basically the same reasons you are stating, e.i. not facing enough tough opposition at the weight.


In response to one of your posts I then stated if he were to carry on his career he could achieve it. I think Haye is a talented fighter, and that this era does get downgraded a lot because of the lack of popularity of the division.

To be honest the only way to assess is by looking at who is there now....

Charles beat quality heavies including Louis and Walcott countless times!!

Holy beat Foreman, Moorer, Bowe, Tyson.......

Tyson...unified and cleaned up the heavies and reigned from 86-90.....93-94 etc...

An aging Vlad...Valuev, Ruiz and Audley really comparable..???

This thread is largely pointless. Haye won't be top fifteen when he retires, and he wouldn't be if he didn't retire when he allegedly intends to. Unless he continued unbeaten at heavyweight for about the next twenty years he's not gonna come close, given the cack that's out there masquerading as 'heavyweight contenders'.

Anything else is pure fantasy. Too many ifs. Anyone can apply ifs to any boxer's career, but in reality it doesn't mean diddly.

Problem is if he beats both Wlad and Vitali there isn't a measuring stick to gauge how good those 2 are, such is the dearth of decent heavies for them to fight etc

So the answer in short is a resounding no.

Sorry Baltimora but Louis beat nothing special for 10 years......

Should haye reign for ten years then he has every right to be considered top 10 let alone top 15...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:To be honest the only way to assess is by looking at who is there now....

Charles beat quality heavies including Louis and Walcott countless times!!

Holy beat Foreman, Moorer, Bowe, Tyson.......

Tyson...unified and cleaned up the heavies and reigned from 86-90.....93-94 etc...

An aging Vlad...Valuev, Ruiz and Audley really comparable..???

Charles, a middle, light-heavy at most, not a great record at Heavy.

Holy, Foreman old old man, in fact he is a record breaker, Moorer got beat by the old man, Bowe, chucked his belt in the bin to avoided the no.1 contender. Tyson way past his best, had 3-4 years stint in prison, not good for any boxer.

Tyson, is Spinks his best win or against a past it Holmes?


At Heavy Haye fight against Valuev is only the respected win I have for him, but Wlad would be a huge scalp, if he were to beat Vitali and then beat all the other contender then he will have a great claim for a spot in the top 20 at least.

Most points already covered, but I'll throw in my offering; even if Haye dominates Wladimir from start to finish and then knocks him out in spectacular style, he'd still be a million miles away from an all-time top fifteen Heavyweight spot, for me. In fact, he still wouldn't crack my top twenty-five in all honesty.

The only way he'd get anywhere near a top fifteen placing is if he were to then beat Vitali, and after that go on to make a few more defences against highly-ranked opposition. If that were the case, he'd have a claim. But a win against Wladimir on it's own? No chance. I'd still be reluctant to put him ahead of Wladimir in all honesty (who doesn't quite crack my top twenty) given that the younger Klitschko boy has, for all his faults, been a dominant champion at the weight for a while now, something which Haye can never claim if he does indeed hang the gloves up later this year.

Did Tyson ever beat anyone as good as WK?

It's not really Haye's fault that there is no depth in the Heavyweight division? As for being top 15, i would say he needs to beat Wlad and Vitali convincingly.

People have raved about the Klitchko's for years. People on this board have said that Wlad and Vitali are a different opponent for Haye so if he does do the business why should he not be considered top 15.

Tyson didn't have to.....he had longevity and cleaned up the division.....

Can't beat one big name and go in the top 15...

Might as well have Willard, Spinks in there...come on..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Tyson didn't have to.....he had longevity and cleaned up the division.....

Can't beat one big name and go in the top 15...

Might as well have Willard, Spinks in there...come on..

How many gimme wins is a great win worth?

Longevity being 3 years.

The Klits have greater longevity and have cleaned up the division, and haven't been KO'd in their prime. Klits>>Tyson

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Longevity being 3 years.

The Klits have greater longevity and have cleaned up the division, and haven't been KO'd in their prime. Klits>>Tyson

Which of the Klits has cleaned up the division?

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Longevity being 3 years.

The Klits have greater longevity and have cleaned up the division, and haven't been KO'd in their prime. Klits>>Tyson

Which of the Klits has cleaned up the division?

Both of them.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Longevity being 3 years.

The Klits have greater longevity and have cleaned up the division, and haven't been KO'd in their prime. Klits>>Tyson

Longevity can also be defined by Tyson returning to claim two more Heavyweight belts a full decade after his first, though, which he did. A fair way off the mark to claim that anything the Klitschkos have done can equal Tyson's Heavyweight reign of 1986-1990. Nine successful defences in pretty quick time by modern standards, all belts unified, and while Tyson's level of opposition wasn't stunning (though it was solid), it certainly beats the hell out of the dross the Klitschkos have been feasting off.

As for the Klitschkos not being knocked out in their prime; Purity, Sanders and Brewster, anyone?

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Longevity being 3 years.

The Klits have greater longevity and have cleaned up the division, and haven't been KO'd in their prime. Klits>>Tyson

Which of the Klits has cleaned up the division?

Both of them.

So technically neither of them.

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Longevity being 3 years.

The Klits have greater longevity and have cleaned up the division, and haven't been KO'd in their prime. Klits>>Tyson

Which of the Klits has cleaned up the division?

Both of them.

So technically neither of them.

No, technically both of them.

Couldn't have written in better Chris..

Tyson gets a lot of flak.....But he cleaned up a still aesthetic division, unified and was a dominant champion..

As for Charles..Walcott 4 times and an aging Louis not withstanding the other talent he beat puts him higher than a Vlad beating Haye could dream of..

88Chris05 wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Longevity being 3 years.

The Klits have greater longevity and have cleaned up the division, and haven't been KO'd in their prime. Klits>>Tyson

Longevity can also be defined by Tyson returning to claim two more Heavyweight belts a full decade after his first, though, which he did. A fair way off the mark to claim that anything the Klitschkos have done can equal Tyson's Heavyweight reign of 1986-1990. Nine successful defences in pretty quick time by modern standards, all belts unified, and while Tyson's level of opposition wasn't stunning (though it was solid), it certainly beats the hell out of the dross the Klitschkos have been feasting off.

As for the Klitschkos not being knocked out in their prime; Purity, Sanders and Brewster, anyone?

Vitali, 4 years out, come back and becomes champion again in his first fight, top Tyson comeback by a fair way

Tyson in his come back was getting fed bums, when Lennox came knocking he did what Bowe did and gave up the title than rather than face him.

88Chris05 wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Longevity being 3 years.

The Klits have greater longevity and have cleaned up the division, and haven't been KO'd in their prime. Klits>>Tyson

Longevity can also be defined by Tyson returning to claim two more Heavyweight belts a full decade after his first, though, which he did. A fair way off the mark to claim that anything the Klitschkos have done can equal Tyson's Heavyweight reign of 1986-1990. Nine successful defences in pretty quick time by modern standards, all belts unified, and while Tyson's level of opposition wasn't stunning (though it was solid), it certainly beats the hell out of the dross the Klitschkos have been feasting off.

As for the Klitschkos not being knocked out in their prime; Purity, Sanders and Brewster, anyone?

Tyson returned and got beaten up.

WK's losses were 8 years ago. He's in his prime now.

9 defences is less than the K's have achieved and today's HW division is a golden era compared to the dross of the late 80's.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Longevity being 3 years.

The Klits have greater longevity and have cleaned up the division, and haven't been KO'd in their prime. Klits>>Tyson

Which of the Klits has cleaned up the division?

Both of them.

So technically neither of them.

No, technically both of them.

No, neither of them.

I am a huge fan of the K-bros - but unless they're "sharing" an atg spot; and unless Haye is going to beat both of them in a "tag team" matchup - then no, they haven't both "cleaned up" the division.

Not until they fight each other. Which they're not going to do.

Between the 2 of them, they have destroyed all the top 15 HWs except Povetkin, who declined to be destroyed. However - Wlads' wins don't go to Vitali and vice versa.

Top 15 HW of all time is obviously a little far fetched.

However, with Haye's CW success, and the fact he would have won 6 world titles and became "the man" in 2 weight divisions, it would be a very impressive achievement. Especially when you consider that he's only had just over 25 fights.

Essentially, it depends on how highly Dundee rates Wlad. If one see's Wlad as a good, but unremarkable HW champion, than beating him wouldnt make Haye an ATG by any means.
On the hand, if Dundee rates Wlad as a excellent champion, than its understandable that his opinion of Haye would sky-rocket, if the Hayemaker is succesful.

Haye's ranking would also depend on how he than copes with Vitali afterwards. Although many will point out Vitali's advancing years, a win against Dr Ironfist will give Haye some real rep and legitimacy.
(Bear in mind that Haye will be viewed as the betting underdog against either brother)

Although the likes of Povetkin and Adamek are small fry when compared to the K's, they'd still help in boosting his CV further.

The comparison to Douglas in somewhat flawed. While Buster's win against Tyson is possibly one of the greatest in HW history, Douglas also suffered several poor losses during his career which strongly dent his legacy.
Currently, Haye only has one loss and that can be forgiven since it was more down to inexperince, than inability.

With his speed, power, athleticism, movement, KO record and various other strengths, its not that absurd that Haye's final standing could be Top 20/25.

Of course, at the moment its all a case of "if's" and "buts". A loss to Wlad and Haye finds himself in Herbie Hide territory.

Why is the comparison to Douglas flawed......

Vlad lost to Sanders and Brewster....Douglas lost to Jaco because he had an asthma attack and Tucker was quality.......

Fact is Douglas was a very good heavy who beat a dominant Mike tyson....and beat other good heavyweights as well...

Shame he didn't have a brother to sort Holy out like Vitali and Sanders.

King Beer wrote:It's not really Haye's fault that there is no depth in the Heavyweight division? As for being top 15, i would say he needs to beat Wlad and Vitali convincingly.

People have raved about the Klitchko's for years. People on this board have said that Wlad and Vitali are a different opponent for Haye so if he does do the business why should he not be considered top 15.

The dearth of quality isnt Hayes fault, but that doesnt alter the fact that it exists and that he needs to be judged within the context of it. Yet even within the relative poorness of this era haye has still not fought the best opposition available - wlad would be a huge scalp, but there are other big fights at the weight such as vitali and adamek, without whom his resume will be severely lacking even in an apparent low quality era. Even if he were to beat wlad then vitali, there are too many quality heavies with better cv's, divisional dominance, longevity and percieved ability for haye to get in a respectable top 15. Most would have tyson and holyfield between 10-15, and haye isnt nearly in this class with his CV of barret, valuev, ruiz and harrison. All this is coming from me as a haye fan who sincerely hopes he batters wlad.

i think if haye can beat wlad AND vitali before he retires then he does deserve a spot, as he would have changed the dominace of the heavyweight scene which has been static for a while. however just wlad wouldnt be enough, and to make it in the top 8 or upwards he would need to delay the retirement. doubt that would happen as there is nobody there for him to beat- povetkin and adamez would be good fights but dont think they would add that much to his legacy- shame really as i think haye is in a wonderful position of been a massive draw every fight he does, he's very skilled and apart from the k bros the heavyweight scene is there for the taking. if i was haye i would fight for a least another 2 years and make the money now that would come so easliy to him.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:today's HW division is a golden era compared to the dross of the late 80's.

Excuse me? Dear God...On that note, I think I'll depart from this debate. Cheers.

oxring wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Longevity being 3 years.

The Klits have greater longevity and have cleaned up the division, and haven't been KO'd in their prime. Klits>>Tyson

Which of the Klits has cleaned up the division?

Both of them.

So technically neither of them.

No, technically both of them.

No, neither of them.

I am a huge fan of the K-bros - but unless they're "sharing" an atg spot; and unless Haye is going to beat both of them in a "tag team" matchup - then no, they haven't both "cleaned up" the division.

Not until they fight each other. Which they're not going to do.

Between the 2 of them, they have destroyed all the top 15 HWs except Povetkin, who declined to be destroyed. However - Wlads' wins don't go to Vitali and vice versa.

Who was helping WK while Vitali was retired for 4 years.

Yes Hayes achievements of unifying the cruiser division and then the heavyweight titles in under 30 fights is very impressive.

Vitali and Wlad would be great scalps over greats heavies. The quality on his record would be there but maybe lack a little quantity.

Adamek, Povetkin and Hellinus could be enough to take him into the top 15.

88Chris05 wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:today's HW division is a golden era compared to the dross of the late 80's.

Excuse me? Dear God...On that note, I think I'll depart from this debate. Cheers.

goodbye

Why is the comparison to Douglas flawed......

Vlad lost to Sanders and Brewster....Douglas lost to Jaco because he had an asthma attack and Tucker was quality.......

Fact is Douglas was a very good heavy who beat a dominant Mike tyson....and beat other good heavyweights as well...

Shame he didn't have a brother to sort Holy out like Vitali and Sanders..

------------------------------------


Truss, I was comparing Douglas to Haye, not Wlad.

Haye currently only has one loss on his record, it was a poor loss but it can be excused as he was young and wasnt exactly outboxed or outclassed against Thompson.

Douglas has 6 losses and looked very ordinary in many of those.

That goes against Douglas' all time standing. Haye wouldnt have this same problem when he finally retires and we access his career (if he beat the K's that is).

If Haye beats Wlad and Vitali for me yeah the Klitschkos have been dominant in the division for so many years and beating both of them would surely make him a top 15 all time heavyweight.Beating just Wlad would just make him top 25 IMO.

I wouldn't have either Wlad or Vit in my top 20 heavyweights of all time so no way would Haye get in even if he KOd both of them. Ifhe does it wouldn't make him the premier fighter of his era. Pac and Floyd have that tied down.

PB if Haye decided he wasn't gonna retire and went on beat everyone in the division,Adamek etc would you still not have him in your top 15?

No because I wouldn't have Adamek in a top 50 he's a poor HW. Who else is their Chris Arreola

but sadly one of the best apart from Haye and the Klitschkos.

Adamek would be a good scalp, just because he is not a top 50 heavyweight doesn't mean he would not be a good win.

Quarry, Witherspoon, Terrel, Williams were not top 50 either, doesn't mean they were not great fighters.

If Haye beats Wlad and Vit he may as well retire unfortunately their is nothing else out their. Adamek would be a decent win but if he beats the Ks what's the point?

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

oxring wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Longevity being 3 years.

The Klits have greater longevity and have cleaned up the division, and haven't been KO'd in their prime. Klits>>Tyson

Which of the Klits has cleaned up the division?

Both of them.

So technically neither of them.

No, technically both of them.

No, neither of them.

I am a huge fan of the K-bros - but unless they're "sharing" an atg spot; and unless Haye is going to beat both of them in a "tag team" matchup - then no, they haven't both "cleaned up" the division.

Not until they fight each other. Which they're not going to do.

Between the 2 of them, they have destroyed all the top 15 HWs except Povetkin, who declined to be destroyed. However - Wlads' wins don't go to Vitali and vice versa.

Who was helping WK while Vitali was retired for 4 years.

Hmm. Well during that time Wlad fought:

Castillo, Peter, Byrd, Brock, Austin, Brewster, Ibragimov, Thompson

Some good wins (Peter, Ibragimov).

Some shouldn't have been in there (Austin, Brock, arguably Brewster, Thompson, Castillo).

Either way - missing is Maskaev, Toney, Ruiz, Rahman - amongst others.

Basically - Wlad's "dominance" is missing a few fighters during those 4 years.

Its only since Vitali-Peter where Wlad and Vit have been going through the top 15 of boxrec's ratings.

Either way - missing is Maskaev, Toney, Ruiz, Rahman - amongst others.

So in reality he's missing no one.

VK didn't fight a real contender after his comeback until 2009.

By then WK had smashed Rahman to pieces. Maskaev, Toney and Ruiz kept losing so were never really viable.