Home News Current Champs WAIL! Encyclopedia
The Cyber Boxing Zone Message Board
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 45

Thread: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    105
    vCash
    500

    Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Someone wrote an article defending today's heavyweights. I think its laughable. What do you guys think?

    Stop Hating Today's Heavyweights

    The writer stated:

    "Athletes tend to represent the vanguard of the physical evolution of the human race, with ever-increasing size, strength, speed, and motor capabilities. Nowhere is this progression more evident than in the modern Heavyweight division. At 6'6" and 240+ pounds, Wladimir Klitschko would have dwarfed most of the great champions of the 20 th Century. Today, he's not even the largest of the Heavyweight title holders.

    The new breed of "Dreadnaught" fighters like 7'0" 320+ pound Nikolai Valuev makes it almost astonishing to recall that the legendary Rocky Marciano ruled the division standing all of 5'11" and 184 pounds. There is no question that as a whole, today's Heavyweights step into the ring with physical advantages that place them at a more advanced level than those of previous generations."

    I dont agree. I think there is a plateau where bigger isnt better. Valuev is a good example. He may be 7 foot tall and weigh 325 pounds but he does not hit as hard as a 220 pound in his prime George Foreman. He doesnt hit as hard as a 216 pound in his prime Mike Tyson or a 202 pound Joe Louis. Valuev doesnt hit very good at all with his right. The main thing he has is a left jab.

    IMHO Valuev is just an even bigger version of Primo Carnera, big, posseses size, strength, a good left jab, but lacks a real shock punch.

    Wad Klitschko has skills and power, but his chin is definately suspect.

    Samuel Peter is just plain green.

    Shannon Briggs who really lost to a 48 year old Foreman in the ring (but received an unjust decision) 9 years ago beat one of the new Russian stars Liakhovich in a bout where neither was impressive.

    The divison very much reminds of the early 1930's before Joe Louis. Except today there are no Jack Blackburn's around to develop young talent. That is if any decide to actually take up boxing.

    -Monte

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    I'm the one in the middle.
    Posts
    9,487
    vCash
    500

    Sigh

    Bigger equals Bigger.

    Gheorge Muresan Would have Dwarfed Wilt Chamberlain and Kareem Abdul Jabbar. Yet Big Gheorge couldn't out play Centers MUCH smaller and far less talented than Wilt and Kareem.

    Who was bigger than Tony Mandarich? Guess how many superior O linemen there were to him.....On his own team?

    What is the point of defending a defenseless position? Today's heavyweight division blows chunks. Why try and manufacture an argument to state it is otherwise?

    THe Article is very silly.

    Just my opinion. I could be wrong.

    Hawk

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    394
    vCash
    500

    It seems obvious to me that

    If todays crop of heavies were as good as Mr. Guedel says they are, it wouldn't have been necessary to write the article in the first place.

  4. #4
    Fat Abbot
    Guest

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Size isn't the key initself.

    It's size AND talent that will for the most part make a modern athlete superior to one from say 50-100 years ago.

    Ike Ibeabuchi would be the best example, he was 6'2 240lbs with no fat whatsoever, yet instead of being a plodder with no coordination or reflexes like in decades past, he has quick hands, good movement and has coordination.

    Put Ike in a weak era, like say, the 1960's and Ike would have a field day destroying most of the ranked fighters of that day who were not only smaller than him by as much as 60lbs, but less athletic as well.

    Wlad Klitschko for all his flaws is 240lbs and extremely talented, his fundamentals are also fantastic offensively. With his power, speed and technique it would be hard to argue against him destroying many of the smaller, less talented hw's from past eras.

  5. #5
    MANAGING EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In an undisclosed bunker deep in the weird, wild, woods of the Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    11,450
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Fat Abbott wrote: "Wlad Klitschko for all his flaws is 240lbs and extremely talented, his fundamentals are also fantastic" ...

    Do you realise that what you wrote makes absolutely no sense? He's flawed yet he he's extremely talented & his fundamentals are fantastic???

    Puh-Leeze!

    Lil' Klit is a herring with a heart the size of a raisin. I guess you've forgotten his fight against Brewster where he's pounding the guy & without even getiing hit he collapses to the mat & crawls across the ring on his hands & knees???

    Perhaps the most pathetic & pitiful thing I've ever seen in a ring. Then there's the Sanders fight & the Peter fight where he cringed through 12 rounds.

    He may be bigger than a Liston/Ali/Frazier/Foreman.Holmes/Tyson but he wouldn't have a chance in hell against any of them.

    He simply doesn't have the right stuff ...

    Then there was Brock. A total journeyman. Who came out scared with no legs underneath him & absolutely no balance. If Klit had thrown ONE right hand in the first round the fight would have been over.

    But instead he's so timid & cautious that he can't bring himself to throw a solid right until the 4th.

    The guy has no chin. Can't take it to the body. Has no stamina, panics under pressure & is offensively so cautious that there is nothing I can see to back up your claim.

    Frankly, a smallish 60's heavy like Jerry Quarry would have made him quit. The difference between Klit & all the fighters I mentioned is that he has NO killer instinct. He's a safety first fighter who will get exposed yet again - & SOON.

    GorDoom

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    909
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Today's heavyweights are a joke...when a fighter as limited as Shannon Briggs, among many others, is able to win even one of the many, many trinkets available to fighters today; well it's just shows how pathetic the division is. It's the worst era I have ever seen, or even read about and the bunch of overweight daisies that are fighting today would have very little chance of beating a lot of the journeymen of era's past...against the elite of the past, no fighter in the heavyweight division today could win unless they just absolutely landed a very lucky punch in the first round, but when they don't, most are like Briggs, they're wad is shot by the fifth, or sixth round and fighters like Quarry, Bonavena, Chuvalo, Cleroux, would just have a field day with the heavyweights of today. Now Ali, Frazier, Foreman and Liston would just simply annihilate the likes of Briggs, Klitschko (either one), Valuev and the rest of the bunch…it would not even be close!

    The sad facts are simply…fighters of today are fat, unskilled, unconditioned, and lazy, among other things, but most importantly…the heavyweights of today are very untested when it comes to bouts with top quality opposition, but then again…there just is not much quality out there in the heavyweight division today for a fighter to test themselves against and those that are qualified…well they all try to avoid and ignore one another as much as possible until they are just simply forced, or mandated to fight one another! The heavyweights of today are more interested in having a pretty-looking style that looks good on camera as opposed to a style that is effective!

    Though the comment about the 1960s being a particular weak era pretty much says it all about what the poster actually knows! If I am not mistaken, in another thread the same fellow tried to argue and validate today’s boxers being vastly superior basing it on track and field stats!

  7. #7
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,272
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Quote Originally Posted by GorDoom
    Fat Abbott wrote: "Wlad Klitschko for all his flaws is 240lbs and extremely talented, his fundamentals are also fantastic" ...

    Do you realise that what you wrote makes absolutely no sense? He's flawed yet he he's extremely talented & his fundamentals are fantastic???

    Puh-Leeze!

    Lil' Klit is a herring with a heart the size of a raisin. I guess you've forgotten his fight against Brewster where he's pounding the guy & without even getiing hit he collapses to the mat & crawls across the ring on his hands & knees???

    Perhaps the most pathetic & pitiful thing I've ever seen in a ring. Then there's the Sanders fight & the Peter fight where he cringed through 12 rounds.

    He may be bigger than a Liston/Ali/Frazier/Foreman.Holmes/Tyson but he wouldn't have a chance in hell against any of them.

    He simply doesn't have the right stuff ...

    Then there was Brock. A total journeyman. Who came out scared with no legs underneath him & absolutely no balance. If Klit had thrown ONE right hand in the first round the fight would have been over.

    But instead he's so timid & cautious that he can't bring himself to throw a solid right until the 4th.

    The guy has no chin. Can't take it to the body. Has no stamina, panics under pressure & is offensively so cautious that there is nothing I can see to back up your claim.

    Frankly, a smallish 60's heavy like Jerry Quarry would have made him quit. The difference between Klit & all the fighters I mentioned is that he has NO killer instinct. He's a safety first fighter who will get exposed yet again - & SOON.

    GorDoom
    If you watched the fight, one could see that Brock wouldnd't have made it to television in the 1960s. Slow, almost no natural talent, not even very skilled. An average sized HW who at 6'1 220 was VERY soft. He not only managed to hang around for several rounds with Wlad, but on many scorecards the fight was dead even by the 7th round. Brock was WIDE open to a flush uppercut to the chin and over hand rights over his lazy left all night, but since Klitschko doesn't even throw those two punches, and was so damn hesistant overall, he risked losing that fight on a TD.

    Wlad himself was open to quick right hand counters over his left all night, but Brock didn't have the balls/pure natural handspeed to take advantage. Frankly, someone like Quarry wouldn't have even needed their toughness to beat Wlad . . .he would've knocked him out with quick counter-punches by the 4th round.

  8. #8
    MANAGING EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In an undisclosed bunker deep in the weird, wild, woods of the Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    11,450
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Jeez, Hagler, your restoring my faith in having to have credebility as a fighter. Most heavyweight starved fans are so quiveringly eager to jump on ANY heavyweight bandwagon it makes me wanna puke.

    It's great to know that there are still aficionados out there that can still separate the wheat from the chaff.

    GorDoom

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,356
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    I think there are two ways to look at this. I thought Klit looked good last weekend, but that's also comparatively speaking. Were he around in 1991, he's cannon fodder for Bowe, Holy, Tyson or Lewis. So if we're saying Wlad is good in comparison to the past...not so much.

    However, he's not a BAD fighter either and he's certainly not bad today. And there are former heavyweight champiosn throughout history he would have beaten so if he finsihes laying his claim in the division, he's certainly not the worst champion ever. Not even close. He's just an average middling one who came along at a time when he could maximize income against a soft field.

  10. #10
    MANAGING EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In an undisclosed bunker deep in the weird, wild, woods of the Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    11,450
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    "And there are former heavyweight champiosn throughout history he would have beaten ".

    Cliff:

    Name me three. & I'm not talking about alphabet asterixe's, I'm talking REAL heavyweight champions.

    In fact, even cocaine crazed or seriously drug/alcohol damaged heavyweight alphabet champs from the 80's like Dokes, Witherspoon, Pinklon, Bonecrusher, Tubbs, etc. would have handled him on tneir good nights.

    Even a disappointment like Cooney would have sent him into never, never, land.

    Like I said earlier, Wlad just doesn't have the right stuff.

    GorDoom

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,356
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Fine:
    Primo Carnera
    Tommy Burns
    Floyd Patterson

  12. #12
    MANAGING EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In an undisclosed bunker deep in the weird, wild, woods of the Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    11,450
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    I'll give you Primo with reservations ... But Floyd & Burns 6-5 pick 'em at worst & that's giving Wlad probably more credit than he deserves.

    GorDoom
    P.S. I consider Tommy Burns to be one of the most VASTLY underrated fighters in history. Not talking as a heavyweight champ but as an all-time P4Per.

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,356
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Absolutely right on that Bucket, but too small to beat Klit and by a lot.

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Louisville,ky
    Posts
    1,556
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    To show you guys how bad the division is. If Mike Tyson pulled his head out of his ass, and in any kind of shape. he could win the title easy.

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    347
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Quote Originally Posted by GorDoom
    "And there are former heavyweight champiosn throughout history he would have beaten ".

    Cliff:

    Name me three. & I'm not talking about alphabet asterixe's, I'm talking REAL heavyweight champions.
    Can I play?

    I think Klitschko beats:

    Carnera;
    Johannsen;
    Liston.

  16. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,356
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Liston would have folded Klit up like an accordion.

  17. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    347
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Quote Originally Posted by Crold1
    Liston would have folded Klit up like an accordion.
    With all due respect, I see Liston becoming frustrated from having Klit's jab in his face...

    Liston's plodding style would be made to order for that long jab, and a thunderous straight right.

    I think Klit hits harder than Leotus Martin, and we know how that turned out.

  18. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Cicero, New York
    Posts
    513
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Quote Originally Posted by newpoppop
    With all due respect, I see Liston becoming frustrated from having Klit's jab in his face...

    Liston's plodding style would be made to order for that long jab, and a thunderous straight right.

    I think Klit hits harder than Leotus Martin, and we know how that turned out.
    The Sonny Liston of 1958-1962 (his prime years) would have destroyed Wlad.
    Wlad would have been terrified and would come apart in sections soon as he got hit by Liston.

  19. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    398
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    I'd offer someone but I'm busy trying to remember the all time greats Wladimir Klitshko has beaten. Sorry, I seem to be drawing a blank.

  20. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    180
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    One word: Indefensible

    Very few lawyers would want this one.

  21. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,783
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    I think we should be down on the American heavies for sure. These guys are the poorest lot in history and they have no excuses except for excess and lifestyle. But youre being too hard on the foreign heavies who are taking over. Its their BEGINNING. These guys are just starting out and the future and the better heavies coming are going to be the guys following. They are just learning to fight and just learning what boxing big time is all about. They are going now on just genes. The learning is coming as they learn more with a generation or two and the great champs will come out of this.
    By the way fellas, the early and prime Liston would have been too much for these today AND Ali, Frazier, Holmes, Foreman and Tyson. Lewis and Holyfield and Bowe? Against Sonny? Comon on now...................

  22. #22
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,444
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Quote Originally Posted by newpoppop
    I think Klit hits harder than Leotus Martin, and we know how that turned out.
    I think Liston hit harder than Lamon Brewster and Corrie Sanders, and we know how that turned out.

  23. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    347
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Quote Originally Posted by Elwill7847
    The Sonny Liston of 1958-1962 (his prime years) would have destroyed Wlad.
    Provided the Liston of 1958-1962 didn't quit on his stool as he did when he couldn't hit Clay.

  24. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,444
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Quote Originally Posted by newpoppop
    Provided the Liston of 1958-1962 didn't quit on his stool as he did when he couldn't hit Clay.
    Much like limited fighters such as Peter, Sanders and Brewster were able to, I have a suspicion Liston would be able to land on Klitschko.

  25. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    A lair deep in the Maine woods
    Posts
    520
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Sonny Liston would have murdered Wlad Klitschko.

    Sonny threw 60-70 hard left jabs per round. His left jabs were like most guys' right hand.

    Again, I'd bet my balls and my right arm that Liston would have easily defeated Klitschko. One look at Sonny and Wlad would've crapped his trunks.

  26. #26
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,384
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Liston would have KOd Wlad with the jab.

  27. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,890
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Quote Originally Posted by TKO Tom
    Again, I'd bet my balls and my right arm that Liston would have easily defeated Klitschko. One look at Sonny and Wlad would've crapped his trunks.

    Okay, okay, I think Sonny would catch and crunch Wlad, too, but -- damn, man, it's going to take a lot more of a sure thing than a boxing match to induce me to put my valuables into the betting mix. I mean, what if Liston slips on the steps climbing to the ring and breaks a knee? Would we have to rename TKO Tom "Lefty the Eunuch"? Think twice before you wager once, dig it? PeteLeo.

  28. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    53
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    Of Klitschko's tangible characteristics, I'd break it down as follows:

    Klitschko's positive traits:

    1) He is the most athletically gifted 6'6 or taller heavyweight I've ever seen.
    2) He has a fine jab.
    3) He has good power in his straight right.

    Klitschko's flaws:

    1) He has a glass jaw.
    2) He does not have great stamina (but non uncommon for big men).
    3) He is not aggressive.
    4) He doesn't throw a wide assortment of punches. Granted, he throws some good straight punches, but unlike other big men who had any measure of success (including Lewis), he doesn't surprise opponents with wide hooks or uppercuts.

    It must not take much to study Klitschko. Any fighter preparing to fight him must clearly know that they will see lots of jabs and straight rights. It's only a matter of getting inside his long arms and accessing that cinderella shoe of a jaw.

    Summary:

    While Klitshcko's strengths are clearly overshadowed by his visible short-comings, I have to give him credit. He has come a long way considering he relies on a limited arsenal and has a glass jaw. It shows the impact that athletically gifted big men could have on the heavyweight division.

    As for Liston-Klitschko, I'm sorry, but Liston wins that fight 10 out of 10. Liston may have quit against Ali, but you can argue that Klitshcko quit against Purity and Brewster. And Liston had none of the flaws that Klitschko has and he posessed all of Klitschko's strengths (minus the 6'7 height).

  29. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    I'm the one in the middle.
    Posts
    9,487
    vCash
    500

    We ALL know how Sonny Liston

    Leotis Martin turned out?

    Well I think most of us do and most of us realize exactly how old Liston was at the time as well.

    But knowing exactly how that fight turned out one must also realize that Liston was doing exceptionally well until he began to slow down later in the bout and was taken out by an awesome right hand.

    What most of us also know is that the trouble that Martin was in in the 4th round, Wlad would NOT have survived.

    So NO, I will not concede that even the aged version of Sonny against Martin would have been beaten by Klit. To say NOTHING of what a prime version would have done to him.

    He'd have Oxy-Cleaned him.

    And regarding the quetion of who were the 6'6", 250 pound, athlletic former Olympians on Holmes', Ali's, Lison, Foreman, Frazier's resume? Well there aren't any that I can find who have shown that were beaten by Purity, Brewster and Sanders, if that is what is being asked.

    hmmmm. Lamon Brewster was 6'0" 226 when he ko'd Wlad. And SLIGHTLY less accomplished than the previously mentioned Greats. Who happened to be very similar in the measurement, if not the accomplishment and skill category.

    Hawk
    Last edited by hawk5ins; 11-20-2006 at 10:29 AM.

  30. #30
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Dodge City
    Posts
    2,144
    vCash
    500

    Re: Defending Today's Heavyweight Divison?

    The Leotis Martin post was among the worst I've ever read on this forum.

    The poster takes no consideration to Listons age or miles on the clock, and also seems to think Wlad could outjab Liston?!

    Apart from the fact Listons famed jab is argubly the best in history, his 84" reach outjabs Wlads 81" reach.

    Wlad can beat guys up, but he cant fight back or survive a real brawl, and there is far too much evidence on video to refute this.

    I'd be very confident a guy like Leotis Martin could climb off the deck, detached retina or not, and take Wlad out when things get a little too hot for him.

    Liston would likely knock Wlad out with a jab.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
News Current Champs WAIL! Encyclopedia Links Home