Where do you rank Wlad all-time?

[billeau2]

No color or commie lines. Being global, for real global not just using the term, means a lot to me.

I debate myself as to whether or not I see colorline or even no commie era champions as true world champions. No matter what, Wlad's on the right side of the debate.


Far as size goes. I'm not sold. I make prosthesis for a living and from that I don't really believe weight division past 175 are actually necessary. We always get new divisions the same way we did Bridger. There is no talented small HW who would be doing well without the big boys. There's no 205er or abouts out there that always wins against other 205ers or about but never does well against a 265er.

Probably because at about 175 there is enough weight behind punches to hurt any human. You don't get tougher or denser bones or anything like that for being huge.

Reach and stuff like that causes me to pause on it but given there is never and was never a great small HW who struggled with big men exclusively I don't think that's much issue either.


I looked for the era when smaller HWs were losing en mass, didn't happen.

I looked for the man who does very well against his own size but not against bigger men, also did not happen.

What does happen is periods where there is no small HW talent. I mean Oscar Rivas is the top ranked bridger and his one loss is to whyte. He fits what they're selling, if, Oscar was ever considered a talent to watch in the first place. The second place guy is a man no one gives a hoot about who lost to a 197. That's not a small HW who'd do well in a division of small HWs. That's just a guy who lost. Lerena? Lost in the 190s as well. Dmitry is another.

There's nothing to suggest presently and in history I find nothing to suggest that these divisions did anything but give poorer boxers a division while protecting giants from looking silly against men half their weight.

Totally agree with this... been trying to make the same point here fir years lol. Another fact: Look at the actual size of champions there is no connection to size, no graph showing bigger champions as a correlate.

[Dr. Z]

No color or commie lines. Being global, for real global not just using the term, means a lot to me.

I debate myself as to whether or not I see colorline or even no commie era champions as true world champions. No matter what, Wlad's on the right side of the debate.


Far as size goes. I'm not sold. I make prosthesis for a living and from that I don't really believe weight division past 175 are actually necessary. We always get new divisions the same way we did Bridger. There is no talented small HW who would be doing well without the big boys. There's no 205er or abouts out there that always wins against other 205ers or about but never does well against a 265er.

Probably because at about 175 there is enough weight behind punches to hurt any human. You don't get tougher or denser bones or anything like that for being huge.

Reach and stuff like that causes me to pause on it but given there is never and was never a great small HW who struggled with big men exclusively I don't think that's much issue either.


I looked for the era when smaller HWs were losing en mass, didn't happen.

I looked for the man who does very well against his own size but not against bigger men, also did not happen.

What does happen is periods where there is no small HW talent. I mean Oscar Rivas is the top ranked bridger and his one loss is to whyte. He fits what they're selling, if, Oscar was ever considered a talent to watch in the first place. The second place guy is a man no one gives a hoot about who lost to a 197. That's not a small HW who'd do well in a division of small HWs. That's just a guy who lost. Lerena? Lost in the 190s as well. Dmitry is another.

There's nothing to suggest presently and in history I find nothing to suggest that these divisions did anything but give poorer boxers a division while protecting giants from looking silly against men half their weight.

I call them " Super heavyweights with skills " meaning a large man who stands 6'4" or taller, has a 79" reach or greater, weights 230 pounds or more and backs it up with skills, most notably a fine jab. Most of them have good power.

Jess Willard, Abe Simon and Primo Carrera do not fit this definition.

These " super heavyweights " with skills came to heavyweight boxing around 1990, and ever since you be hard press to find the #1 spot not going to one of them for a long period of time. Usually they have top amateur credentials.

Bowe_Lewis_W Klitschko_ V Klitschko_Joshua_Fury.

Since they came about the smaller heavyweights under 210 pounds that are ranked are very rare and even the best at 220 ( Povetkin ) can't beat them. Let's address the elephant in the room right now. Holyfield. Okay he can compete ( On Ped's ), but he's also 1-4 vs Lewis and Bowe on fair score cards.

Before his passing Manny Steward, perhaps boxing best trainer said he was wrong. He used to think very large heavies lacked the coordination to reach the top. Not anymore.

[BattlingNelson]

Ha, we finally agree on a Klitschko ranking!!! I know you have been waiting a long time for this day! 😆

Hahaha. Oh yeah. When everything is said and done, I reckon you and I would agree on most things in boxing tbh. I cannot remember if you ever weighed in on my old time vs modern time thread though. That may cause a rift lol.

[JAB5239]

Hahaha. Oh yeah. When everything is said and done, I reckon you and I would agree on most things in boxing tbh. I cannot remember if you ever weighed in on my old time vs modern time thread though. That may cause a rift lol.

I think we have mostly agreed in our years here. Bump that old thread though, it's what makes these forums fun.

[MartialMind]

No color or commie lines. Being global, for real global not just using the term, means a lot to me.

I debate myself as to whether or not I see colorline or even no commie era champions as true world champions. No matter what, Wlad's on the right side of the debate.


Far as size goes. I'm not sold. I make prosthesis for a living and from that I don't really believe weight division past 175 are actually necessary. We always get new divisions the same way we did Bridger. There is no talented small HW who would be doing well without the big boys. There's no 205er or abouts out there that always wins against other 205ers or about but never does well against a 265er.

Probably because at about 175 there is enough weight behind punches to hurt any human. You don't get tougher or denser bones or anything like that for being huge.

Reach and stuff like that causes me to pause on it but given there is never and was never a great small HW who struggled with big men exclusively I don't think that's much issue either.


I looked for the era when smaller HWs were losing en mass, didn't happen.

I looked for the man who does very well against his own size but not against bigger men, also did not happen.

What does happen is periods where there is no small HW talent. I mean Oscar Rivas is the top ranked bridger and his one loss is to whyte. He fits what they're selling, if, Oscar was ever considered a talent to watch in the first place. The second place guy is a man no one gives a hoot about who lost to a 197. That's not a small HW who'd do well in a division of small HWs. That's just a guy who lost. Lerena? Lost in the 190s as well. Dmitry is another.

There's nothing to suggest presently and in history I find nothing to suggest that these divisions did anything but give poorer boxers a division while protecting giants from looking silly against men half their weight.

What about mass x speed=power?

I see what you are saying but look at Tyson Fury the only reason he can KO guys is because he has 270 lbs behind his fists.

At 175 he'd be very feather fisted with his punches.

[Marchegiano]

What about mass x speed=power?

I see what you are saying but look at Tyson Fury the only reason he can KO guys is because he has 270 lbs behind his fists.

At 175 he'd be very feather fisted with his punches.

Two things to that.

I didn't mean to say they can't or don't generate more energy, they do. But there's only so much needed for a KO and only so much needed to break bones. Bigger men don't need to be hit harder to hurt them.

I'm not saying it isn't logical, but, where in history were small HW being killed or seriously injured? I'm pretty sure that's because the smaller end of the division can hit hard enough to hurt too.

Also, speed favors the small man, 5 x 1 and 1 x 5 are equals.

[billeau2]

I call them " Super heavyweights with skills " meaning a large man who stands 6'4" or taller, has a 79" reach or greater, weights 230 pounds or more and backs it up with skills, most notably a fine jab. Most of them have good power.

Jess Willard, Abe Simon and Primo Carrera do not fit this definition.

These " super heavyweights " with skills came to heavyweight boxing around 1990, and ever since you be hard press to find the #1 spot not going to one of them for a long period of time. Usually they have top amateur credentials.

Bowe_Lewis_W Klitschko_ V Klitschko_Joshua_Fury.

Since they came about the smaller heavyweights under 210 pounds that are ranked are very rare and even the best at 220 ( Povetkin ) can't beat them. Let's address the elephant in the room right now. Holyfield. Okay he can compete ( On Ped's ), but he's also 1-4 vs Lewis and Bowe on fair score cards.

Before his passing Manny Steward, perhaps boxing best trainer said he was wrong. He used to think very large heavies lacked the coordination to reach the top. Not anymore.

Bowe was hardly exemplory that way... I mean lets compare champions well established to be consistent, ditto for Vitali.

So you are essentially talking about Lewis, Wlad and Fury... A little more than a possible trend when we consider the whole of heavyweights and success. I will even spot you Joshua.

It would take a lot more constant wins by bigger fighters, and a few more large champions to confirm a real change this way.

[Dr. Z]

Bowe was hardly exemplory that way... I mean lets compare champions well established to be consistent, ditto for Vitali.

So you are essentially talking about Lewis, Wlad and Fury... A little more than a possible trend when we consider the whole of heavyweights and success. I will even spot you Joshua.

It would take a lot more constant wins by bigger fighters, and a few more large champions to confirm a real change this way.

It's been nearly 30 years since Bowe became champion. On his better nights, Bowe was something. That is a long time, and in my book good enough to confirm a clear change.

The " super heavies with skills " have been ruling the division since 1990, almost never losing on points (Unless its vs each other ) and only losing via KO to punchers. That is the game these days and it will be for the future.

I follow the amateur game. In the 91KG+ division ( super heavyweight ) almost all of the top fighters are 6'4"-6'9" these days. You would be hard pressed to find any good one under 6'2", and 6'2" is uncommon!

If you look at who the top young prospects are, they all are super heavyweights...Hrgovic, Joyce ( He's not young, but doesn't have a lot of fights ) Dubois, Yoka, Ajagba, Makhmudov, ect...they are all 6'4 or taller with close to an 80 inch reach.

You can make up your own mind. I'm not saying a 6 foot tall 200 pound heavyweight can't win. IMO that guy is going to need great power and a top chin, because he's not winning on points.

How many losses combed did Bowe. Lewis, Klitschko, Klitschko, Joshua and Fury lose on points in their prime years? The answer is just once ( Holy over Bowe in the 2d fight ) and that one was very close! I think that is telling.

Smaller excellent boxers like Chris Byrd are becoming rare, and there has not been a Mike Tyson type in a while either.

[billeau2]

It's been nearly 30 years since Bowe became champion. On his better nights, Bowe was something. That is a long time, and in my book good enough to confirm a clear change.

The " super heavies with skills " have been ruling the division since 1990, almost never losing on points (Unless its vs each other ) and only losing via KO to punchers. That is the game these days and it will be for the future.

I follow the amateur game. In the 91KG+ division ( super heavyweight ) almost all of the top fighters are 6'4"-6'9" these days. You would be hard pressed to find any good one under 6'2", and 6'2" is uncommon!

If you look at who the top young prospects are, they all are super heavyweights...Hrgovic, Joyce ( He's not young, but doesn't have a lot of fights ) Dubois, Yoka, Ajagba, Makhmudov, ect...they are all 6'4 or taller with close to an 80 inch reach.

You can make up your own mind. I'm not saying a 6 foot tall 200 pound heavyweight can't win. IMO that guy is going to need great power and a top chin, because he's not winning on points.

How many losses combed did Bowe. Lewis, Klitschko, Klitschko, Joshua and Fury lose on points in their prime years? The answer is just once ( Holy over Bowe in the 2d fight ) and that one was very close! I think that is telling.

Smaller excellent boxers like Chris Byrd are becoming rare, and there has not been a Mike Tyson type in a while either.

The heavyweight division is all about the punches... what is the losest KO percentage any heavyweight has? Hint I doubt you could find one at 50 percent... Most are at least 70 percent. You can do the math on how that translates for any "points" wins.

Yes right now a lot of the marquee prospects are bigger, but like all such prospects this list turns into very few fighters... hence, parker, Ruiz, and other such guys are still, as much a possibility as any of the many larger fighters coming up.


And lets not forget "Ruiz." The ammy style is limited compared to the range of fighters in the past. We are getting big men with statistically limited skills... im sorry for every Fury who IMO is a total exception (more on that in a minute) there are guys more akin to Charles Martin. The tape does not lie. Will we continue to see larger and larger men? Lets have this conversation in a few years...

Fury is exceptional. He could be half his size lol. he is the one fighter in the group trained traditionally, and it shows... big, or small, fury will probably best Joshua easily, and it is not because of his size, it is because of his skills, and reach. I see him more akin to Liston, than a modern Ammy trained, limited guy like most of what we see in the division today. The Cubans are another exception and again, we see competitive guys like King Kong, who have a lot of skills more traditionally associated with a great fighter.

I see a huge decline in what a fighter can do in the ring and find it hard to believe these prospects we see could prevail when the division was stronger... Lewis would be an exception this way. His work with Stewart and training in professional camps showed and he was an exceptional champion who could move well, had all the punches, could fight from all ranges and was tough. Even he was punched out a few times...

On Bowe's better nights? Holy outboxed him when he listened to his corner... He lost when he wanted to slug it out, and Bowe looked like crap against good to excellent Golata (when Golata was sane lol). Bowe was a pipe dream. He had all the makings but like most fighters, never attained greatness. He hardly dominated because of size... He did have skills, that I agree with.

Let me qualify one point here: When I say Fury is more akin to Liston I mean specifically that Fury is very skilled, and has incredible reach. I know they have incomprable styles.

[Dr. Z]

The heavyweight division is all about the punches... what is the losest KO percentage any heavyweight has? Hint I doubt you could find one at 50 percent... Most are at least 70 percent. You can do the math on how that translates for any "points" wins.

Yes right now a lot of the marquee prospects are bigger, but like all such prospects this list turns into very few fighters... hence, parker, Ruiz, and other such guys are still, as much a possibility as any of the many larger fighters coming up.


And lets not forget "Ruiz." The ammy style is limited compared to the range of fighters in the past. We are getting big men with statistically limited skills... im sorry for every Fury who IMO is a total exception (more on that in a minute) there are guys more akin to Charles Martin. The tape does not lie. Will we continue to see larger and larger men? Lets have this conversation in a few years...

Fury is exceptional. He could be half his size lol. he is the one fighter in the group trained traditionally, and it shows... big, or small, fury will probably best Joshua easily, and it is not because of his size, it is because of his skills, and reach. I see him more akin to Liston, than a modern Ammy trained, limited guy like most of what we see in the division today. The Cubans are another exception and again, we see competitive guys like King Kong, who have a lot of skills more traditionally associated with a great fighter.

I see a huge decline in what a fighter can do in the ring and find it hard to believe these prospects we see could prevail when the division was stronger... Lewis would be an exception this way. His work with Stewart and training in professional camps showed and he was an exceptional champion who could move well, had all the punches, could fight from all ranges and was tough. Even he was punched out a few times...

On Bowe's better nights? Holy outboxed him when he listened to his corner... He lost when he wanted to slug it out, and Bowe looked like crap against good to excellent Golata (when Golata was sane lol). Bowe was a pipe dream. He had all the makings but like most fighters, never attained greatness. He hardly dominated because of size... He did have skills, that I agree with.

Let me qualify one point here: When I say Fury is more akin to Liston I mean specifically that Fury is very skilled, and has incredible reach. I know they have incomprable styles.

1. You missed my point. If this were 1992 and you said, let's wait and see if the future champions are Bowe's size, there would be some validity. 30 years later the best one are all Bowe's size or better. You can bring up Holyfield, okay he's 1-2 vs Bowe and 0-2 vs Lewis on fair score cards. 1-4 over all vs skilled big men, which underscores my point as he was the best 215-220 point man for the past 30 years.

2. There are quite a few heavyweight under 50% Ko that have made world champion. Usually they are smaller. Chris Byrd for example ( 46.81% ). Under 70%? Easy, Tyson Fury. The point I was trying to make is super heavies with skills don't lose points decisions and are seldom outboxed by smaller heavies. There is a clear correlation

3. You mention Parker, well he''s 6"4" tall isn't he? Yes he is. Like I said short heavyweights are pretty much out if business these days. This goes double for the amateurs stars ( Medal winners in the World Amateur boxing champions or Olympics ) , who are the mostly likely pro stars. Give me your list of top heavies under 6'2" tall active today? And then since 1990. See my point?

4. Comparing Fury to Liston? No on styles, Liston was confrontational, Fury much more of a strategic boxer who's quicker on his feet. On power its Liston all the way. On height, Fury has about 8" in him. Fury has a very long reach. I agree. So did Liston. My point, these days anything less than 78" is short, hence super heavyweights who can box are going to have many advantages over the historic 6 foot 200 pound heavyweight with a 75" reach. He's giving up roughly 5'6" in height, 30-50 pounds in weight and about 6" in reach. Billeau, that's 2-3 additional weight classes to be conservative which is why there aren't ANY small heavyweights today and they have been rare at the top for the past 30 years. The best big men today are not skilled like Jess Willard,Buddy Baer, or Abe Simon. Not even close. They are much better. That tape does not lie.

The elephant in the room, is this. Some might say, Dempsey tore up Willard, or Joe Louis whipped B Bear, so sure they can whip 240 pounds a skilled big guy today. UNPROVEN. Willard was a bipedal punching bag and old, and B Baer though he floored Joe Louis would look like a hack next to Wlad or Lennox Lewis. The films do not lie. The problem is the emotional attachment to smaller past champions who do care to admit how the game has changed / won't use 30 years of data for a good example.

If your a heavyweight toddy who's short, with limited reach and giving up 30+ pounds your brining a knife to a sword fight.