Comments on: How to Defeat a Klitschko Part II – Wlad

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:42:08 +0000

What do I think it will take ????

1) A similarly sized boxer that approaches boxing as a 365 day a year job , because the Klitschko brothers do.
2) Excellent skill set combined with powerful punches
3) Someone that has excellent movement
4) The person has to be tough as nails and determined to win

I dont know if others agree , but I genuinely believe that Ike Ibeabuchi would have given them a hell of a fight.

By: patrick

patrick — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:57:08 +0000

True: no ever from history could beat Vitali and Wlad of today.

By: patrick

patrick — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:51:02 +0000

Ali?
Ali went 15 rounds with guys 50 pounds smaller than Wlad, he got klnocked down by a 190 pounder and had to cheat to win. To think that he could beat Wlad is to be in the grip of a myth. Ali had the size and reach advantage in almost all of his fights, and he works of a snappy jab and footwork, fluid combinations. But its not easy to jab against a taller, bigger man with a greater reach. Ali cannot reasonably win by stoppage given that he failed to stop much much smaller and worse opponents, so his hope is to win on points, which means getting past Wlad’s jab… I just don’t see it. Although Ali was a great competitor so it is of course possible.

By: jeff

jeff — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:41:01 +0000

Frazier, Louis, etc. – GREAT fighters. GREAT champions. But you’ve got to be kidding. These guys – like most past heavyweight champs are just way too small to beat Wlad or Vitali. It’s amazing to me how many people still say that. The human animal is evolving. The athlete is evolving. If you take fighters or athletes from previous eras where size is controlled or not a factor, then it’s a different story. Yeah, Ray Robinson would beat todays middleweights. But in the heavyweight division, there’s just too much disparity in size. It’s like people saying Bill Russell was the greatest center of all time. His acheivements speak for themselves – 11 rings!!! But at 6′9″, he’d struggle with power forwards of today, let alone guys like Shaq. They always say you can’t compare athletes from different eras, and I basically agree with it. But when you try to match up former greats with todays, try to leave out the legendary and mythical part of the equation. Consider some of the fighters who were competetive in their respective eras. For instance, in Frazier’s absolute prime, he fought an absolute war with Jerry Quarry. It was Ring’s fight of the year. Quarry got stopped in the late rounds due to cuts. And Quarry could fight. But he was like 6′, and barely 200 lbs. Can you imagine him getting in the ring with Wlad? Nuff said.

By: Alex

Alex — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:18:03 +0000

Andrew, Excellent comment, it’s true that realisticaly boxers from the past would of had no chance against modern boxers, it’s like old and new cars.

By: Eagor

Eagor — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:08:39 +0000

Nobody could ,can and will beat Wladimir, Klitshchkos are the greatest foeever and ever

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:33:16 +0000

I enjoyed reading the articles detailing how to beat the Klitschko brothers.

However I strongly disagree with the section detailing boxers who you think would beat them.

Why is it so hard for boxing fans to admit that the great fighters from the past would not stand a chance at beating the new breed of monster heavyweights.
Honestly Muhammed Ali , Joe Louis , Joe Frazier and even George Foreman would be considered cruiserweights today.
All the speed and technique they had would count for squat against an opponent that knows exactly how to fight as the bigger man.

It is no coincidence that Lennox Lewis vs V Klitschko was an even contest – they were physically well matched.