Should Wlad be on P4P list

I'm taking Ali's comment from P4P list and putting it here since I think it's better place to discuss it. Sticky should just be for rankings.

All of you know I can't stand the Klits, but I am not a blind hater either. I think Wlad should be on P4P because done all that is expected of him. Not liking his style is not good enough reason to deny it.

He's beaten like what, 10 Top Ten ranked HWs, usualy all by knock out. He fights 3 times a year. And he's The HW CHAMP

yes he belongs on the list of the ten best fighters in the world..i dont like the term p4p so i use that as a substitute.. hes active wins in great fashion against the best competition avalible.hes proven himself on a continual active basis..

Easily. He probably deserves the 5 spot.

Unless one is of the arbitrary (to me anyway) heavyweights shouldn't count school, I don't see how one avoids it. How many guys have polished off five ranked contenders, and an ex-champion, in the last three years while losing nary a round?

Marlb, how many top ten ranked guys has Wlad beaten? I'm thinking atleast 10 maybe 12

GrantZilla wrote:Marlb, how many top ten ranked guys has Wlad beaten? I'm thinking atleast 10 maybe 12

Hold on let me go count. Be right back.

An even dozen if I've counted right. In addition, the following "names" were not ranked when they fought, Hasim Rahman, Ray Austin, Ray Mercer, Francios Botha.

That's pretty impressive. How bad would the division be without the 2 brothers?

freakzilla316ftw wrote:That's pretty impressive. How bad would the division be without the 2 brothers?

Shhhhh. Don't let that thought into our galaxy. It could have trerrible repercussions like the Stay Puft Marshmellow Man becoming heavyweight champion.

We'd have 4 bums claiming to be HW Champ

No, he's an ordinary fighter who gets by because of his freakish size, they're plenty more fighters who should be ahead of him on that list.

Beating a dozen Top Ten ranked fighters. Being active. Almost all the wins by KO. Is the HW CHAMP.

I'd say that's enough.

If we're going to knock him for having a boring style, then Mayweather, Ivan(when was on the list) ect should never be on the list.

Again, I don't like the Klits style either. But not going to blindly hate.

It's not because of their styles aren't entertaining, I just don't see either brother as one of the ten best boxers on the planet.

Ali wrote:No, he's an ordinary fighter who gets by because of his freakish size, they're plenty more fighters who should be ahead of him on that list.

Being an ordinary fighter (I think he's better than that) at his size is noteworthy because of how rare that is. Coordination, body control, stamina are all harder to maintain at such a large size and Wlad is an exceptional athlete.

Ali wrote:No, he's an ordinary fighter who gets by because of his freakish size, they're plenty more fighters who should be ahead of him on that list.

This seems to me has no foundation at all. Size is simply a talent like speed, agility, power and ring IQ. Do you similarly dismiss guy's with "freakish" advatages in those areas?

Gumby wrote:

Ali wrote:No, he's an ordinary fighter who gets by because of his freakish size, they're plenty more fighters who should be ahead of him on that list.

Being an ordinary fighter (I think he's better than that) at his size is noteworthy because of how rare that is. Coordination, body control, stamina are all harder to maintain at such a large size and Wlad is an exceptional athlete.

Ain't that the truth.

Ali wrote:It's not because of their styles aren't entertaining, I just don't see either brother as one of the ten best boxers on the planet.

No idea how one defines the word "best." But there aren't even FIVE more accomplished who are still at the top of their game at the moment.

I think Klits would be hard to beat in any division.

How hard would Williams be to beat if he actualy fought tall and hit as hard as Wlad? Tell what, a Wlad in Welter-middleweight division would be another Tommy Hearns.

At Light HW he'd be another Bob Foster

GrantZilla wrote:I think Klits would be hard to beat in any division.

How hard would Williams be to beat if he actualy fought tall and hit as hard as Wlad? Tell what, a Wlad in Welter-middleweight division would be another Tommy Hearns.

At Light HW he'd be another Bob Foster

+1

I just wish we could create a real contender who could test these two. I'd just love to know how good they could be if really, really pushed. Does Wlad crumble or has he gotten mentally tougher? Can Vitali stay healthy over 12 rounds? I just wish I could KNOW!

I realize of course that growing up watching the heavy division of the 1970's may have forever spoiled me.

Being somewhat of a HW Historian, we were definitly spoiled by 70s. No era before it or since it ever had that many good HWs.

I've been reading how same comments we are talking about now as far as the HW division were being said in 1930s HW division. Even Post WWII, writers couldn't understand where all HWs were. They figured get a surge of HWs after the war.

Even on Johnson, Dempsey era there weren't that many good HWs. Why Dempsey was in-active for so long. Was realy nobody to fight but Harris, which Rickard refused to do over race issues

GrantZilla wrote:Being somewhat of a HW Historian, we were definitly spoiled by 70s. No era before it or since it ever had that many good HWs.

I've been reading how same comments we are talking about now as far as the HW division were being said in 1930s HW division. Even Post WWII, writers couldn't understand where all HWs were. They figured get a surge of HWs after the war.

Even on Johnson, Dempsey era there weren't that many good HWs. Why Dempsey was in-active for so long. Was realy nobody to fight but Harris, which Rickard refused to do over race issues

It's really funny. Pre-1900 there were several guys, Sullivan, Corbett, Jackson, Fitzsimmons

1900-1910 it was LOADED with Jeffries and Tom Sharkey and Langford and Johnson and McVea. Of course the black guys got a raw deal.

1910-1925 things mostly stunk with Johnson, Dempsey and that's really it.

1925-1933 is better with Tunney and Sharkey and Schmeling and Baer.

Then there is Joe Louis

After WWII it was pretty good with Ezzard and older Louis and Walcott and Marciano.

The things stink until 1960 or so. The it gets really good really fast. Liston, Patterson, Ingo, Machen, Cooper, Folley and then Ali. THAT is a really good division. It hit another level as Machen, Folley, Cooper are replaced with Frazier and Chuvalo and Foreman and Norton and Bonavena and Quarry and Ron Lyle. THAT IS AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!

Then the 80's were pretty good as were the 90's. Not quite as good as the early 60's but pretty darned good.

But looking back the heavy division is mediocre a lot more than it is good.

1930s wasn't good at all Pre-Louis. Tunney retired, and had horrible fights like Schemling winning title on a faul over Sharkey, and then conterversal rematch where Sharkey got the decision. Then Sharkey losing to Primo who many people think he took a dive. Thins look to pick up after Baer beat the crap out Primp, but then blows it against a bum like Braddock, who then sits in HW title for like 3 years.

Look at that, and puts what's going on today into perspective.

GrantZilla wrote:1930s wasn't good at all Pre-Louis. Tunney retired, and had horrible fights like Schemling winning title on a faul over Sharkey, and then conterversal rematch where Sharkey got the decision. Then Sharkey losing to Primo who many people think he took a dive. Thins look to pick up after Baer beat the crap out Primp, but then blows it against a bum like Braddock, who then sits in HW title for like 3 years.

Look at that, and puts what's going on today into perspective.

I wasn't clear. I only meant that the 1930's were better than the Dempsey years not that it was anything special. I don't disagree with anything you wrote.

Gotcha

I read article while back that compared 30s HW division to todays, and it's realy creepy the similarties.

Tunney=Lewis. Both scuffed at as being boring fighters, and too cebral. Both retired as Champs and left division in disarray. Both defeated the more popular fighter at the time, Dempsey and Tyson.

Schemling=The Klits. Schemling was the Klits idol, and like Schemling, the Klits are hugely popular in Germany. Vitali named his son Max after Schmeling

Primo=Valuev. Enough said

Chageav=Sharkey

marbleheadmaui wrote:

Ali wrote:No, he's an ordinary fighter who gets by because of his freakish size, they're plenty more fighters who should be ahead of him on that list.

This seems to me has no foundation at all. Size is simply a talent like speed, agility, power and ring IQ. Do you similarly dismiss guy's with "freakish" advatages in those areas?

+1 I've always thought this.