Can/will Wladimir Klitschko beat Joe Louis' record ?

Hagler's Bald Head wrote:Joe Louis defended the Heavyweight Title 25 times.

Wladimir Klitschko has 15 defenses and is 35 years old.

Can Wladimir do it ?

IMO I see him possibly equaling or overtaking Larry Holmes 20 defenses. To beat Joe's record Wlad would have to box well into his forties, it's not impossible to see Wlad doing that as Vitali has shown but I just don't see him sticking around that long.

Hagler's Bald Head wrote:The division is so weak at the moment it's very possible for Wladimir to get very close to that record. He also lives a healthy lifestyle and takes care of his body, and he doesn't exactly take alot of damage in his fights these days so I can't see wear and tear slowing him down.

It's a horrible thought to imagine a G.O.A.T like Joe Louis being overtaken by Wladimir

SlickMoney wrote:

Hagler's Bald Head wrote:The division is so weak at the moment it's very possible for Wladimir to get very close to that record. He also lives a healthy lifestyle and takes care of his body, and he doesn't exactly take alot of damage in his fights these days so I can't see wear and tear slowing him down.

It's a horrible thought to imagine a G.O.A.T like Joe Louis being overtaken by Wladimir

Shouldnt really matter. Different eras and no one is going to put Wladimir over Louis because of this "streak". Its like Robert Guerrero being called a multiple division champion. That term really means nothing now.

Hagler's Bald Head wrote:

SlickMoney wrote:

Hagler's Bald Head wrote:The division is so weak at the moment it's very possible for Wladimir to get very close to that record. He also lives a healthy lifestyle and takes care of his body, and he doesn't exactly take alot of damage in his fights these days so I can't see wear and tear slowing him down.

It's a horrible thought to imagine a G.O.A.T like Joe Louis being overtaken by Wladimir

Shouldnt really matter. Different eras and no one is going to put Wladimir over Louis because of this "streak". Its like Robert Guerrero being called a multiple division champion. That term really means nothing now.

Even so it still would sting.

GrantZilla wrote:I've come to appriciate the Klitschkos more and more. I will never be a fan of their style of fighting. But they show up in shape and they will fight anyone. Who have they ducked?

I also don't look at the past with rosy colored glasses either. Competition during Louis' time as Champ was not great either. Or during Larry Holmes' time. Or Tyson's time either.

GrantZilla wrote:No, I just try not be a blind hater. How can I hate the Klitschkos? Yeah, they are boring. But it's up to the competition to step up and beat them, which they've all failed at horribly.

GrantZilla wrote:Now you've made me bust out my evil French alter-ego!!

[u][b]dmar5143 wrote:louis had some poor competion but also fought some guys that were good realy good[/b][/u].in holmes time the competion was far better then today and also in tysons time.cooney weatherspoon bonecrusher smith jimmy young kenny norton carl williams in the begining mike weaver and a few others surely are better then the hws of the past 6 years or so.in tysons time frank bruno spinks again smith razor ruddock hollifield thomas yes hollifield was in mike stime but mike went to jail before he could fight the winner of douglas-hollifield. and a few others.mikes competionwas better..a few of thoses guys had a excellent chance to beat both brothers.also in mike era was bowe holmes and mikes era overlapping was dokes even thought they didnt fight.
yep larry fought some scrubs also.so did louis .the k brothers with the exception of haye has fought nothing but scrubs.

boxinglawyer wrote:[quote="[u]
Despite its derogatory nickname, most of the group were top-ten heavyweights. Of the twelve fighters Louis faced during this period, five were rated by The Ring as top-ten heavyweights in the year they fought Louis: Galento (overall #2 heavyweight in 1939), Bob Pastor (#3, 1939), Godoy (#3, 1940), Simon (#6, 1941), and Baer (#8, 1941); four others (Musto, Dorazio, Burman, and Johnny Paycheck) were ranked in the top ten in a different year. rankings were REAL then, none of this manufacured crap you get today. When you throw in guys like Schmeling, Baer, Conn (who is one of the GREATEST fighters to ever live, but gets little acclaim), Walcott and Charles, you have a resum'e that makes the Klits pale in comparison. Louis is the best heavy ever and he earned it.

GrantZilla wrote:

boxinglawyer wrote:[quote="[u]
Despite its derogatory nickname, most of the group were top-ten heavyweights. Of the twelve fighters Louis faced during this period, five were rated by The Ring as top-ten heavyweights in the year they fought Louis: Galento (overall #2 heavyweight in 1939), Bob Pastor (#3, 1939), Godoy (#3, 1940), Simon (#6, 1941), and Baer (#8, 1941); four others (Musto, Dorazio, Burman, and Johnny Paycheck) were ranked in the top ten in a different year. rankings were REAL then, none of this manufacured crap you get today. When you throw in guys like Schmeling, Baer, Conn (who is one of the GREATEST fighters to ever live, but gets little acclaim), Walcott and Charles, you have a resum'e that makes the Klits pale in comparison. Louis is the best heavy ever and he earned it.

That doesn't mean much when the competition is not great. Wlad has beaten over a dozen top ten Ring Magazine ranked opponents.

I was aware of that. The point was that people make the assumption due to the name "Bum of the Month", That Louis didnt fight top competition. He fought the ABSOLUTE best that was around in his time, and many of them were BETTER than the best in the world today. The Klits are fighting the best that are around for sure. Sadly though, the BEST around are pretty sorry.