--- Rating Wladimir Klitchsko ---

My ratings

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Overall - 8

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

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

9.5 for technical ability............

I take it you give Ali 10 ????.........So that means he's the second best technically gifted heavy of alltime..

Certainly not pretty to watch and unfortunately for him the level of available opposition in recent years has been poor but I would just to say have him in there. Close call though.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:9.5 for technical ability............

I take it you give Ali 10 ????.........So that means he's the second best technically gifted heavy of alltime..

What would you give him, he is technically so good, that, along with his size is his main asset, I probably wont give Ali a 10, he wasn't very good at going to the body and his hooks were often thrown without great technique, Joe Louis - in my opinion, had Technique superior to Ali. Technique isn't everything, Ali never really relied on it, like he did his other assets, without Great Technique Wlad wouldn't go anywhere, he doesn't really have the toughness of a Ali to afford to fight with less technique

So if you think Louis was technically superior to Ali......

That means Ali scores les than 10 and is inferior or on the same level to Wlad Klitscho................

Not really much I can say to that..

I will say that no doubt Klitty will be in the top 15..........but mainly for the reason Girls aloud were above The beatles in some lists...

Generally because people aren't clued up on what came before..........

I'll also say I'd pick Frank Bruno to knock out Corrie sanders....and I'd pick him to beat every one of Wlad's opponents.........

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:So if you think Louis was technically superior to Ali......

That means Ali scores les than 10 and is inferior or on the same level to Wlad Klitscho................

Not really much I can say to that..

I will say that no doubt Klitty will be in the top 15..........but mainly for the reason Girls aloud were above The beatles in some lists...

Generally because people aren't clued up on what came before..........

I'll also say I'd pick Frank Bruno to knock out Corrie sanders....and I'd pick him to beat every one of Wlad's opponents.........

Ali was never that technically gifted, he relied on other things such as speed and reflexes in his prime, toughness and ring IQ once past it, thats nothing to do with technique - Not saying Wlad > Ali, in terms of Pure technique Ali isn't superior wlad, nor is he superior to Joe Louis

Ali was technically brilliant at what he did. He was not text book boxing as he wrote his own book.

Well I'm sure there would be a plethora of coaches who tell you that, in terms of 'technical ability' in the pure sense, Wladimir is Ali's superior. Wlad boxes out of a textbook, whereas Ali did most fundamentals taught to youngsters incorrectly, or in some cases just didn't do them at all.

As Eddie Futch said, "Ali shows you his weaknesses - and then beats you with them."

Now and then a fighter so exceptionally gifted from an athletic, rather than boxing per se, point of view comes along and is so good that they can defy the basics and still beat the best out there through a mix of God-given attributes which can't really be worked on or taught gradually. Usually, it's blinding speed and reflexes. Ali (and Roy Jones, for instance) had those qualities to such a degree that seriously well-honed boxers were made to look like club fighters in their pomp. Once their primes ended, they didn't have them, and as a result took a hell of a lot more punishment. Unfortunately for Roy, he didn't have Ali's whiskers or ring IQ, which made his downwards spiral a much quicker one.

Anyway, back to Wladimir.

I'd put Wlad within the top fifteen Heavyweights of all time now, personally, though not in the top ten. You can deride his opposition all you like, but the fact is that several Heavyweights have been given comparable, perhaps even worse, eras to compete in but still failed to match Wladimir's longevity. In that respect, there's really only a small handful who can match him.

Likewise, I think he perhaps ends up higher than a lot of others would care to think if we ranked the Heavyweights simply on a who beats who basis. I imagine it will remain the norm for the likes of Rocky, Johnson, Jeffries and Holyfield to rank ahead of him for most people, but personally I'd make him favourite against all of the above (ok, a bit closer to 50:50 with Evander, but you get my drift).

If it was all decided by the two criteria above, Wladimir would probably be unlucky to reside outside of anyone's top ten.

Sadly for him, his level of opposition and the shadow cast over the division by his brother (in fifty years time, I believe most scribes will still be pondering which of the Klitschko brothers was the 'better' fighter, even if Wladimir's superior career record means he must be considered a 'greater' one) mean that he has to make do with a lower placing than that overall, for me, but his consistency, technical assets and cleaning up of just about all the belts in an era where this is being seen less and less entitles him to a pretty lofty spot all the same, in my view.

Probably something like #13 on my own list.

azania wrote:Ali was technically brilliant at what he did. He was not text book boxing as he wrote his own book.

Am not saying he wasn't, I agree with you, he was Brilliant technically in what he did, but so is Wladimir

The minute I saw the title of this thread, my mind said, in a Davy Jones manner "Release the Kraken!" This thread is going to escalate. Im not going to comment, just watch. Hopefully Winchester gets wind of it.

88Chris05 wrote:Well I'm sure there would be a plethora of coaches who tell you that, in terms of 'technical ability' in the pure sense, Wladimir is Ali's superior. Wlad boxes out of a textbook, whereas Ali did most fundamentals taught to youngsters incorrectly, or in some cases just didn't do them at all.

As Eddie Futch said, "Ali shows you his weaknesses - and then beats you with them."

Now and then a fighter so exceptionally gifted from an athletic, rather than boxing per se, point of view comes along and is so good that they can defy the basics and still beat the best out there through a mix of God-given attributes which can't really be worked on or taught gradually. Usually, it's blinding speed and reflexes. Ali (and Roy Jones, for instance) had those qualities to such a degree that seriously well-honed boxers were made to look like club fighters in their pomp. Once their primes ended, they didn't have them, and as a result took a hell of a lot more punishment. Unfortunately for Roy, he didn't have Ali's whiskers or ring IQ, which made his downwards spiral a much quicker one.

Anyway, back to Wladimir.

I'd put Wlad within the top fifteen Heavyweights of all time now, personally, though not in the top ten. You can deride his opposition all you like, but the fact is that several Heavyweights have been given comparable, perhaps even worse, eras to compete in but still failed to match Wladimir's longevity. In that respect, there's really only a small handful who can match him.

Likewise, I think he perhaps ends up higher than a lot of others would care to think if we ranked the Heavyweights simply on a who beats who basis. I imagine it will remain the norm for the likes of Rocky, Johnson, Jeffries and Holyfield to rank ahead of him for most people, but personally I'd make him favourite against all of the above (ok, a bit closer to 50:50 with Evander, but you get my drift).

If it was all decided by the two criteria above, Wladimir would probably be unlucky to reside outside of anyone's top ten.

Sadly for him, his level of opposition and the shadow cast over the division by his brother (in fifty years time, I believe most scribes will still be pondering which of the Klitschko brothers was the 'better' fighter, even if Wladimir's superior career record means he must be considered a 'greater' one) mean that he has to make do with a lower placing than that overall, for me, but his consistency, technical assets and cleaning up of just about all the belts in an era where this is being seen less and less entitles him to a pretty lofty spot all the same, in my view.

Probably something like #13 on my own list.

Great post mate, I agree with you on most if not all of the points in the post, personally I think most would agree with me when I say Vitali in a H2H sense (vs other Greats) is superior, but I have him 5-10 places below Vitali, often fighters get ranked higher once they retire it is interesting to note Muhammad Ali now ranked by most as the GOAT at HW if not in top 2, was ranked number 9 in the mid 70's at which point he had already built his solid resume, consisting of other greats - at that stage alone he should have been ranked in the top 2, in terms of ability and resume.

Tell me a Wlad opponent that Bruno doesn't beat ?????

Wlad wasn't technically efficent the night Sanders bombed him out..

kingraf wrote:The minute I saw the title of this thread, my mind said, in a Davy Jones manner "Release the Kraken!" This thread is going to escalate. Im not going to comment, just watch. Hopefully Winchester gets wind of it.

Haha, what do you actually think of the ratings, if you don't want to comment where you have wlad ranked,

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Tell me a Wlad opponent that Bruno doesn't beat ?????

Wlad wasn't technically efficent the night Sanders bombed him out..

So his level of opponents reduce Wlad's technique, Ali fought some bums as well, you can compare his technique against those punchbags against wlads against the punchbags he faces.

Where was Ali's technique against a guy like Doug Jones, if he didnt have durability he would have been out. Wladimir was no where, near his prime then.

I know where it was against Foreman, Liston, Big cat, Frazier, Norton, Quarry, Folley, Shavers.........

All great opponents who are ten times better than anything Wladdy has faced..

Brewster..

I rate Wlad top 20ish all time, ATG, maybe 15 at a push. His brother (Who, as many of you have probably noted, Im a huge fan of) is top 10, minimum, in my opinion.

This is the same brother that couldn't get out of the way of a sluggish old 38 year old Lewis jab.......

Vitali is higher than Frazier ???...........

I've got Simon Brown higher than Ray Robinson at 147 !!!!

Ha ha...............

Frazier gets smoked by Vitali 10 times out of nine! Really dissapointed that you continue to purport the myth that Vitali got destroyed by Lewis. Vitali was leading that fight by two rounds that night. Lead the Jabs stats and Power punch stats. He got cut by the thumb of the glove, hardly a corker of a punch, just an unfortunate cut.

you're wumming.........

Not at all. Frazier never faced a 6'7 245lbs fighter. The closest he got was the 6'4 224lbs Foreman. Outside of the knock downs, Frazier never put together any reasonable offence, against a guy Ali hit with a lead right 12 times in one round (so hardly a defensive guru). If he cant properly hit a 6'4 225lbs Foreman, I'd like to know how he does that against a 6'7, reach 201cm (vs Fraziers 185 cm).

I voted no, but it is very close. I think he just misses it, but probbaly in the top 20. to be honest, it does get a bit more arbitary after the top 5.

You can't compare Foreman to Wlad.....

Foreman could take a shot..

Oh, I thought you meant Vit. I still dont see Frazier taking out Wlad, but that could happen.

Vitali is going to avoid a big left hook over 12 rounds ???

He hasn't got Foreman's power to stop him...

You pick Cotto to beat Ray Robinson ??

kingraf wrote:Oh, I thought you meant Vit. I still dont see Frazier taking out Wlad, but that could happen.

Frazier takes out Wlad more often than not for me. Wlad still gets in the ATG HW list somewhere around 10-15

Frazier is way to small, he would be outweighed by 50 pounds and just run in to Wlad's jab all night and despite what many say Joe didn't have the greatest chin either.

I have Wlad at 9, he has been the number one heavyweight for 7 years now, hardly loses a round and is given a pretty raw deal for his early defeats when others seem to get a free pass on it.

Truss - He may not avoid for 12 rounds, but it isnt going to drop him. Sanders hits harder than Frazier (Cue disagreement) and he only rocked him. Vitali wont drop vs Frazier. Frazier on the other hand, contrary to pop culture had a very intimate knowledge of the canvas (And Im not even referring to Foreman).

That's right guys the best left hook in Heavy Boxing isn't going to drop Vitali if it lands on his chin.

Only dropped Ali once in 41 rounds. Never dropped Foreman. Didnt finish Bonavena, Bugner, or Floyd Cummings.

Hearns never dropped Dewitt......Alfonso Hayman.............Couldn't finish off Mark Medal.......

Yet when he hit chins like Duran, Shuler, Cuevas and Roldan they were unconscious.........

Get my drift.........Vitali hasn't got a defence..

If he doesn't have a defence how does he hardly ever get hit?

And yet he doesnt get dropped...

monty junior wrote:If he doesn't have a defence how does he hardly ever get hit?

Look at his opponent list..

Again... Ali hit - & connected 12 lead rights on Foreman in a round. You expect me to believe Foreman was a defensive guru? Frazier couldnt muster one single telling punch in two fights, and you telling me he has a chance? I mean, I love Frazier, but the Klitshckos are all wrong for him.

Have you seen the Frazier-Foreman fight ?? Or do you just look on Boxrec??

George Foreman - "I felt one of those left hooks whistle by my chin and knew I had to get Joe out of there or I was in big trouble"..........

Have them both on my hard drive. Watch the first one quite often. Why, do you want me to look into round 1? Just did. Scored it 10-6 Not much fun, though. You.

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

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

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

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

He felt it "whistle" by? So it didnt hit him? Oh. I once felt a minibus whistle past me. Still alive though. And Joe still got knocked out

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:George Foreman - "I felt one of those left hooks whistle by my chin and knew I had to get Joe out of there or I was in big trouble"..........

I think George was being kind to Joe, he humiliated him twice but didn't want to tarnish his reputation to much by making out how easy it really was for him.

Statistics go a long way in sports but I struggle with the suggestion that Klitschko belongs in a top 15 heavyweight list.

There's an argument that Wladimir hasn't ever established himself as the best man in his division. Respected publication Boxing Monthly continues to rate Vitali in their top spot.

Ring Magazine, however, decided that beating Ruslan Chagaev qualified him as the heavyweight champion (a dubious decision to say the least). Since then he's defended the magazine's title seven times against:

Chambers
Peter
Haye
Mormeck
Thompson
Wach
Pianeta

It's a pretty woeful list. -- Haye excluded. On top of that his performances have been excrutiatingly monotonous -- nails down a blackboard excrutiating.

I don't see how anyone can rate him over the following (not necessarily in order):

Ali
Louis
Johnson
Holmes
Foreman
Marciano
Frazier
Holyfield
Dempsey
Liston

Jeffries
Tyson
Lewis
Charles
Walcott

Then there's:

Tunney
Langford
Patterson
Schmeling
Norton
Baer
Bowe

Klitschko's a good technician and a fearsome hitter (when he becomes brave enough to throw his right hand) but a tedious performer who has feasted, largely, on poor opposition.

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

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

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

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

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

hazharrison wrote:Statistics go a long way in sports but I struggle with the suggestion that Klitschko belongs in a top 15 heavyweight list.

There's an argument that Wladimir hasn't ever established himself as the best man in his division. Respected publication Boxing Monthly continues to rate Vitali in their top spot.

Ring Magazine, however, decided that beating Ruslan Chagaev qualified him as the heavyweight champion (a dubious decision to say the least). Since then he's defended the magazine's title seven times against:

Chambers
Peter
Haye
Mormeck
Thompson
Wach
Pianeta

It's a pretty woeful list. -- Haye excluded. On top of that his performances have been excrutiatingly monotonous -- nails down a blackboard excrutiating.

I don't see how anyone can rate him over the following (not necessarily in order):

Ali
Louis
Johnson
Holmes
Foreman
Marciano
Frazier
Holyfield
Dempsey
Liston

Jeffries
Tyson
Lewis
Charles
Walcott

Then there's:

Tunney
Langford
Patterson
Schmeling
Norton
Baer
Bowe

Klitschko's a good technician and a fearsome hitter (when he becomes brave enough to through his right hand) but a tedious performer who has feasted, largely, on poor opposition.

Longetivity and compare favourably against most H2H. Chambers and Peter were still top contenders. I admit the last few guys have been pretty poor but at least they are undefeated. All of the guys you listed fought genuine journeymen at times during their times as champion, guys even worse than the likes of Pianeta.

I think your scenario is entirely possible too, Monty. Frazier's right up against it facing either brother, largely because they're nigh-on a whole different species to him in terms of size.

But having not seen them face a supreme pressure fighter yet - even one of Frazier's average (for a Heavyweight) size - I just wouldn't feel comfortable making them a runaway favourite. I'd maybe give the Klitschkos a 55:45 edge, but I really do believe it'd be that close.

Chris - my biggest "issue" is the reach issue. Despite his bob & weave technique, Frazier was not exactly Tyson-like (before he bought his own hype) in terms of difficulty to hit. Frazier gives up SIX inches vs Vitali, nearly eight vs Wlad. I cant see how he goes in without being driven back. He got floored twice by Bonavena. And he lost to an Ali who trained for thrilla in Manilla with the sort of drive normally associated with the likes of Tex Cobb.

Well, I believe that Ali himself had a reach the same as both of the Klitschkos, give or take an inch. Frazier being hard to hit wasn't a rule, granted, but he did show that he could make even the nest of them miss, as he did against Ali in 1971.

I think size naturall has to be considered, but physical dimensions aren't the be all and end all, and I think tyring to make an evaluation of Frazier-Klitschko based purely on those kind of numbers isn't the best way to go about it.

By rights, Valuev should never have lost to the likes of Chagaev and Haye. Valuev, of course, is no Klitschko, but then again both Chagaev and Haye are no Frazier.

monty junior wrote:

hazharrison wrote:Statistics go a long way in sports but I struggle with the suggestion that Klitschko belongs in a top 15 heavyweight list.

There's an argument that Wladimir hasn't ever established himself as the best man in his division. Respected publication Boxing Monthly continues to rate Vitali in their top spot.

Ring Magazine, however, decided that beating Ruslan Chagaev qualified him as the heavyweight champion (a dubious decision to say the least). Since then he's defended the magazine's title seven times against:

Chambers
Peter
Haye
Mormeck
Thompson
Wach
Pianeta

It's a pretty woeful list. -- Haye excluded. On top of that his performances have been excrutiatingly monotonous -- nails down a blackboard excrutiating.

I don't see how anyone can rate him over the following (not necessarily in order):

Ali
Louis
Johnson
Holmes
Foreman
Marciano
Frazier
Holyfield
Dempsey
Liston

Jeffries
Tyson
Lewis
Charles
Walcott

Then there's:

Tunney
Langford
Patterson
Schmeling
Norton
Baer
Bowe

Klitschko's a good technician and a fearsome hitter (when he becomes brave enough to through his right hand) but a tedious performer who has feasted, largely, on poor opposition.

Longetivity and compare favourably against most H2H. Chambers and Peter were still top contenders. I admit the last few guys have been pretty poor but at least they are undefeated. All of the guys you listed fought genuine journeymen at times during their times as champion, guys even worse than the likes of Pianeta.

I'm not there have been many worse than Pinata.

Chambers and Peter were top contenders, which says everythign you need to know about the era Wladimir has campaigned in. And to make matters worse, Peter had Wlad flopping about the ring like he did against Sanders and Brewster (but was too knackered to finish him off).

88Chris05 wrote:Well, I believe that Ali himself had a reach the same as both of the Klitschkos, give or take an inch. Frazier being hard to hit wasn't a rule, granted, but he did show that he could make even the nest of them miss, as he did against Ali in 1971.

I think size naturall has to be considered, but physical dimensions aren't the be all and end all, and I think tyring to make an evaluation of Frazier-Klitschko based purely on those kind of numbers isn't the best way to go about it.

By rights, Valuev should never have lost to the likes of Chagaev and Haye. Valuev, of course, is no Klitschko, but then again both Chagaev and Haye are no Frazier.

Imaginary head-to-heads should have little bearing here. Fighters should be rated on how great they were in their time.

I'd argue that Wladimir wasn't.

Vitali is difficult match for Frazier because he has the durability to go with his size. Even if Frazier gets on the inside then he could still end up getting manhandled and beaten there.

Wlad is less durable so if Frazier did get past his jab, which would be more difficult, then he could potentially cause Wlad alot of problems if Wlads leaning doesnt hold up.

Long as youve been living, you have never seen Valuev coming in for a fight looking like a Klitschko.

Chris, Im not merely physically comparing the two. Im taking the styles into account as well. Klitschko (Vit) has the chin to withstand a hit. But, more importantly in the Foreman fight, Frazier showed he has no answers for a guy he cant hit. He isnt gonna out jab a Klitschko. And he will get hit coming in. Frazier has hit the floor many times, while Vitali probably couldnt spell floor if you gave him a "floo" headstart. He is too big. Not chinny enough. And has genuine KO power. His little brother might get sparked by Joe, though.