Wladimir Klitschko only wins by outweighing his opponents

One of the most bizarre arguments against Wladimir Klitschko that he wins only by out-talling or out-weighing his opponents.

First of all, complaining about body features in a contact sport is ridiculous. If someone has, say, long arms and strong pectoral muscles then it's idiotic to blame him for

  • starting a career in martial arts
  • benefiting from his long arms
  • using his muscles
  • having longer arms and more muscles than his opponent

If someone wouldn't have certain body features he wouldn't be in the boxing business in the first place.

 

Second of all: If you don't like body features to out-dominate the opponent's body features, then watch sub-heavyweight divisions. There is an upper weight limit in lower divisions and therefore all boxers are approximately same-sized.

But accusing a heavyweight boxer of being heavy is like accusing a featherweight of being too light.

The heavyweight division is the only division where it's explicitly allowed to outweigh your opponents by an unlimited amount of pounds, hence complaining about a boxer for being as heavy as he is, is complaining about the core definition of "heavyweight division".

 

 

Height and reach advantages of a boxer

Let me start off with a general remark about the height and reach of a boxer:

Very often the exact height and reach figures are unknown (or wrong), even for famous boxers. Hence arguing with height and reach is often very unreliable.

Take for example Wladimir Klitschko vs Paea Wolfgramm.

Klitschko and Wolfgramm met both at the Olympic Games 1996 (gold medal finals) and in the professional boxing ring, therefore Wolfgramm's height is both listed at Olympic websites (and therefore WikiPedia) and at BoxRec.

But, wait, what is that?

Paea's height is listed as 6'4" at BoxRec and 6'1"(!) at Wikipedia. Klitschko's height is listed at 6'6" at BoxRec and 6'5" at Wikipedia.

The same applies to other boxers. George Foreman's reach is listed at BoxRec.com as 82", yet as 78.5" in the old TV broadcasts.

Heights and reaches given are often unreliable. And in many cases they are completely unknown. The longer ago a fight took place the less known are the heights: Approx. 60% of Rocky Marciano's opponents' heights are unknown.

This applies even more so to the reach of a boxer. Reaches are unknown in even more cases than heights.

ADDITIONALLY the reach of a boxer is rather useless even when known, because the reach of a boxer includes FINGER LENGTH.

Sometimes another figure is given ("arm length") which is measured from the arm pit to the end of the fist (= without finger length). But this figure is also misleading because the RANGE of a boxer includes also the shoulder span and leg length (and other factors). Thus even if a boxer would out-reach his opponent he still might be out-ranged himself.

 

 

Does height matter at heavyweight boxing?

When you check the history of boxing then you will find out that TALL boxers were never really good. That is the reason why basketball-player-shaped boxers (like ·Marcellus Brown) never achieved anything in the ring.

Marcellus Brown (7'0") weighed everything from 190+ lbs to 280+ lbs and showed up in athletic and less athletic shapes, and he only compiled a bummy record of 26-17 (with 13 KO losses). Whether you take Marcellus Brown 7'0" or Jameel McLine 6'6" (who is not that bummy) or others like Julius Long 7'1":

The boxers with the best records of the past were all around 6'2" and/or somewhat chubby (Muhammad Ali, Larry Holmes, Joe Frazier, Mike Tyson, Evan Fields, Rocky Marciano, Nikolay Valuev, Primo Carnera). Throughout the history of boxing these were the 2 winning factors: Chubbiness and/or 6'2"-ishness.

It's only now (= with the advent of Lennox Lewis and the Klitschkos) that for the first time in boxing history tall+athletic boxers rule the division. That's basically a combination never seen before.

But instead of considering this as a proof of the quality of the Klitschkos (= being successful DESPITE their athleticism and their tallness), Klitschko haters use it against them by claiming "The Klitschkos dominate only because all potential boxers are in the National Basketball Association".

Well, basketball was around for ages, but tall+good boxers are only around since the Klitschkos.

The same applies to American Football. American Football exists since ages, yet the tall bulky muscular types were nowhere to be seen in decades.

Additionally basketball and American Football are mainly US sports. Tall men from other countries do NOT go into basketball or football. The boxing pool is NOT drained by basketball or football. Big muscular men usually don't go to boxing, because big muscular men usually don't perform well at boxing.

Whether basketball-player-tall men show a mediocre performance at heavyweight because of

  • thinner necks (= weaker chin)
  • longer legs (= easier out-of-balance when hit or when wildly missing a punch)
  • longer arms (= slower, telegraphed punches)
  • taller bodies (= easier gassing because the heart has top pump blood higher)
  • less muscles (= because the weight consists mainly of bones and inner organs)

is an interesting academic question. But the fact remains, that basketball players have an disadvantage at boxing, just as smaller boxers have an disadvantage at basketball.

In fact there are MANY boxers taller than the Klitschkos but only the Klitschkos have piled up their impressive records. That there are only so little good TALL boxers shows that height does not substitute quality.

So, yes, height does matter, but only if the height difference is huge (e.g. Mike Tyson vs McBride). Otherwise quality and weight are much more important.

An often heard variation of this complaint is "All past greats won against taller-than-self opponents and the Klitschkos didn't".

But this is a cherry-picked statistic ("designed flaw") like you can make them up by dozens, even against the greats of the past e.g. "Muhammad Ali is worse than Wladimir Klitschko because he didn't win against an unbeaten non-bummy southpaw" or similar, see Of Klitards and CLAYtons. This is the most retarded boxing blog ever and I won't bother to read it! –> "Designing a cherry-pick statistic"

Additionally the reason why the Klitschkos didn't beat boxers who were taller-than-self is not that they LOST to them or DUCKED them. It's simply that the Klitschkos are so tall that it's hard to find anyone of similar height and quality. The only worth mentioning opponent would be ·Nikolay Valuev (7'2"), but he retired after getting beaten by Ruslan Chagaev and then by David Haye, and then both, Chagaev and Haye, got beaten by Wladimir Klitschko.

Moreover, both Klitschkos _DID_ face (and beat) opponents who were pretty much the same height.

 

 

Vitali Klitschko vs Tomasz Adamek

When ·Tomasz Adamek fought ·Vitali Klitschko everybody was commenting how small and light Adamek is and how little chances he had.

Yet Adamek already won against TALLER boxers and against HEAVIER boxers (he fought 4 boxers heavier than Vitali Klitschko, actually up to 42 lbs heavier than Vitali Klitschko).

Additionally Tomasz Adamek is a superb boxer with a solid chin and is a multiple world champ, having won 7(!) world title bouts.

When he fought Vitali he weighed 216 lbs just as did ·Muhammad Ali when he fought ·George Foreman.

Yet, against Vitali Klitschko Adamek looked like a school-boy. Helpless, barely dangerous, being severely hurt several times.

Since Adamek is a high qualtity proven boxer (= multiple world champ) against far heavier and taller opponents, Vitali Klitschko must feature another attribute aside of weight and height: Quality!

It's obviously not the weight but the CLASS = QUALITY of Vitali Klitschko.

I have watched now 3 versions of the fight and the HBO version is the most interesting because it features Emanuel Steward as the co-commentator who sheds light on the subtle, near invisible maneuvers that Vitali Klitschko performs to win round after round against Adamek.

 

Now, if one would judge Adamek's quality solely on his performance against Vitali (or Mormeck's quality solely on his performance against Wladimir), then one could call them "bums" and "tomato cans" like so many other opponents before them have been called. Not because it's really true, but because the performance of the Klitschkos is so overwhelmingly good, that they BUMMIFY their opponents.

 

 

Wladimir Klitschko only wins by out-weighing his opponents

WEIGHT is _THE_ most important factor in boxing (aside of skill, but skill is a SUBJECTIVE assessment).

No matter how skilled you are, in a martial arts contest you are more likely to lose (even against a far worse opponent) the bigger the weight difference is, as everyone can tell you because…

…everybody knows that Mike Tyson
would have DESTROYED ·Oscar De La Hoya,
despite Oscar De La Hoya being taller, younger, reachier (and possibly more skilled) than Mike Tyson.

Everybody knows that.

Why?

Because weight is the most important factor (aside of quality).

And actually that's a no-brainer since boxing is divided into weight divisions and not into

  • "height divisions"
  • "reach divisions"
  • "age divisions"
  • "neck circumference divisions".
  • and not even into "athleticism divisions".

Weight means "body mass" and means "more muscles" and "more resistance" and thus having more body mass in a martial arts sport gives you automatically an incredible advantage.

Thus a "weight complaint" (= "only wins by out-weighing") should be be taken far more seriously than a "height complaint" or a "reach complaint".

 

Let me give you some example fights of famous KO'ers and how their KO'performance suffered when fighting against heavier opponents:

  • Vitali Klitschko was outweighed by Lennox Lewis and lost
  • Vitali Klitschko was outweighed (or nearly outweighed) by Shannon Briggs, Samuel Peter, Timo Hoffmann, Kevin Johnson, Chris Arreola, Ross Puritty, Dereck Chisora and couldn't canvas-KO these opponents
  • Wladimir Klitschko was outweighed by Ross Puritty and lost
  • Wladimir Klitschko was outweighed or nearly-outweighed by Sam Peter and Mariusz Wach and couldn't KO them
  • Mike Tyson was outweighed by Buster Douglas, Lennox Lewis, Kevin McBride, Danny Williams and got KO'ed.
  • Earnie Shavers KO'ratio against lighter-than-self opponents: 83%, against heavier-or-equal opponents: 66%.

We are talking here about some of the best KO'ers the world has ever witnessed (Vitali Klitschko, Wladimir Klitschko, Mike Tyson and Earnie Shavers) and yet the opponents' weight seems to have influenced the outcome more than the opponents' quality.

Yes, such a correlation exists, too, when fighting TALLER opponents. That's why Mike Tyson performed so mediocre against non-bums > 6'3", see Tyson vs Klitschko -OR- Mike Tyson would KO Wladimir and Vitali within 1 round. But this correlation exists mainly when fighting TALLER+SKILLED opponents, whereas taller+unskilled opponents pose not much of a challenge for good boxers.

Weight however is a huge factor even against BUMMY opponents.

BUMMY+HEAVIER opponents are far more dangerous than BUMMY+TALLER opponents.

Boxing fans are too obsessed with athleticism, yet superbly athletic guys like Herbie Hide or Albert Sosnowski performed FAR WORSE than less athletic yet equally heavy guys like Dereck Chisora.

It's the weight+quality, stupid!
Not the athleticism+tallness!

-and-

Out-weighing can be more important
than out-muscleing

For more impressive stats how the weight massively influenced fighters like Ali, Frazier and Shavers, see Height and weight are irrelevant at heavyweight boxing -OR- Joe Louis vs Primo Carnera, Abe Simon, Buddy Baer

 

 

How to choose the easier heavyweight opponent

If you had the choice between 2 opponents and you wanted to choose the easier one, then here's how to choose:

First opponent isSecond opponent isThe easier option is
tall+bummyheavy+bummythe taller opponent is easier
small+heavytall+lightthe lighter opponent is easier
heavy+bummylight+skilledthe bummy opponent is easier
heavy+skilledtall+skilledthe tall opponent is easier
athletic+lightchubby+heavythe athletic opponent is easier
athletic+bummychubby+skilledthe athletic opponent is easier
athletic+skilledchubby+bummythe bummy opponent is easier
heavy+southpawheavy+orthodoxthe orthodox opponent is easier

Fistic Statistic [#3369.1]

 

At heavyweight boxing the rule of thumb is
Skill > weight > stance > tallness > athleticism

-and-

At heavyweight athleticism plays basically NO ROLE, except in the case of undertraining.
But in such a case not the chubbiness causes the problem, but the undertraining.
If a chubby boxer is well-trained and well-conditioned he poses a far greater threat than a trained light boxer.

 

 

 

Heavyweight boxing statistics by weight

So after all the talk, let's finally check some weight statistics:

namewins against heavier-than-self opponentsmedian weight difference of these win opponentsheavier-than-self KOsheavier-than-self KOs (200×2, non-bums)
·Vitali Klitschko117 lbs93
·Wladimir Klitschko2412 lbs2210
·Lennox Lewis104.5 lbs84
·Muhammad Ali178 lbs104
·Mike Tyson2311 lbs1911
·George Foreman89.5 lbs81
·Rocky Marciano3210.5 lbs280
·Joe Louis1615.5 lbs133
·Joe Frazier1210 lbs72
·Larry Holmes327.5 lbs216
·Sonny Liston76 lbs52
·Ken Norton1512 lbs110

Fistic Statistic [#3369.2]

 

There you have it: What is used as an argument against Wladimir Klitschko is actually a hallmark attribute.

Also the following boxing stat is impressive:

NameIn how many wins was the opponent outweighed?Overall KO'ratio (excluding NCs)KO'ratio against heavier-or-same opponents
Vitali Klitschko72%90%83%
Wladimir Klitschko52%84%88%
Lennox Lewis70%72%83%
Muhammad Ali69%57%58%
Mike Tyson48%78%77%
George Foreman88%83%100%
Joe Frazier62%72%46%
Joe Louis75%72%81%
Larry Holmes50%57%60%
Nikolay Valuev98%65%- (only 1 fight)
Sonny Liston80%72%70%
Earnie Shavers71%76%58%

Fistic Statistic [#3369.OutWeigh] Winning by out-weighing the opponent

As you can see Wladimir Klitschko's outweigh statistic is again a hallmark attribute.

You see also that some so called "heavy punchers" turn out to be mainly steamrollers (= powerful against smaller targets, but with little technique), e.g. Joe Frazier, Earnie Shavers, because their KO'ratio drops considerably when facing heavier opponents.

 

No other boxer at real heavyweight 200×2 has performed as well against heavier-than-self opponents than Mike Tyson and Wladimir Klitschko.

Which against proves how Klitschko haters ignore the history of the sport.

 

Additionally it's interesting that Klitschko haters hold 2 mutually exclusive views:

1) To discredit the Klitschkos haters shout that weight is the most important factor ("The Klitschkos only win because of their weight")

2) To discredit the Klitschkos haters claim that weight is not a factor at all ("Boxers of previous eras would have no problems with either Klitschko. Coz weight ain't nothing to Ali")

What is it, haters?

 

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 4.3/5 (29 votes cast)
Wladimir Klitschko only wins by outweighing his opponents, 4.3 out of 5 based on 29 ratings
Did you find this information useful? Then please donate...

Comments (20)

  • Mr. Objective says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Xuxa Byxo]
    #3688 Mr. Objective (2012-01-03rd)

    Great article Admin. FACTS AT THEIR BEST. Respect.

    Another proof of KlichKO brothers' true, not fabricated, greatness. Especially The best ever. Vladimir KlichKO.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)
  • wesley says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Xeki Kusa]
    #3693 wesley (2012-01-03rd)

    :-P THANKYOU for listening to my suggestion admin guy/klitchko fan. and it looks like you have done a fairly non biased table, although im not entirely sure, maybe its just your pro wladimir wording thats throwing me off.

    The results are as i expected but 1…LARRY HOLMES. bloody hell, although he cant be considered one of the hardest punchers, it is interesting to see his ko stats and weights he fought against..
    Rocky win hands down, thats amazing.
    Wlad comes in very high, which i am suprised at ill have to admit.
    A good bit of reading, still doesnt mean wlad is a super hero but proves he is a good puncher, so long as all the stats are correct and no funny business has gone on.
    There is an argument as i have stated in another blog that he is top 3/4 super heavy weight great, but still not top ten heavy weight as his opponents are poor.
    …be intesrting if you could do something the same with heights..i expect you will only do a table that wlad will come out on top somehow…but i digress.

    I had a quick look through box rec at the weights/heights, its astonoshing how much heavier everyone is after the year 2000. the suprising thing about though is many of them arent all 6.4/5 yet many of them weigh in access of 235lbs, despite not having the frame to carry that weight…maybe that is where people get the fat/slob idea from….
    In terms of height and reach, it is still quite clear that the klitchkos have a big advantage in that department, whilst a very important stat i will agree that height/reach isnt quite as important as weight, but still is very important.
    But we both agree on that opponent is THE most important factor, which these graphs prove when seeing great fighters beating heavier poorer ones..this is where this era falls down.
    Can you explain a couple of things..what does constitute a 'bum' by your stats?
    And what does 200×2 mean?

    What i have leartned is that wlad and vitali are massive physical freaks, that have a special athletic build that is not the norm, good luck to them.
    In order for them to keep there weight down so low in comparison for there size is quite remarkable, and proves there fitness and conditioning….proves thst diets and conditioning hs improved these days which fighters of years gone past have not had access to.

    Wlad and vitali are 2 of the greatest fighters of all time no doubt, but unfortuanly they dont belong in the heavyweight division, they should be in a super heavyweight division, they are just too big, this is the reason weights were created in the first place.
    If they are to be classed in the heavyweight division they would need to beat each other to break into the top ten best of all time. its the only 'great' opponent either could face.

    Also these 6ft 250lb bums need to get exercising…. :-D

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 3.0/5 (4 votes cast)
  • flag
    [ip2username: Tole Iwu]
    #3708 Boxing Training Fitness (2012-01-09th)

    I love how well you broke this down with stats to back everything up.

    Everything including size has its advantages and disadvantages. All just a matter of how opponents match up to those traits

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
  • NDBoxer says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Wilu Sajy]
    #3787 NDBoxer (2012-02-24th)

    Great points. Also, all statistics aside, if anyone is complaining about being too small then they should either fight cruiser-weight or do some squats and eat more protein. Get out of the unlimited weight class if you can't handle the big guys.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  • Honza says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Jylo Geli]
    #5267 Honza (2012-11-08th)

    You said that Lewis and Klitschkos were first great tall boxers. You forgot to mention Riddick Bowe. He was as tall as Lennox.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  • VVmmvvmm says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Kyvo Kewi]
    #5347 VVmmvvmm (2012-11-30th)

    But maybe Robert Pershing Wadlow(272cm) was the most ideal guy for boxing.
    I can imagine a big Wadlow punoh and Wladimir down.Haha!!!

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  • VVmmvvmm says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Kyvo Kewi]
    #5348 VVmmvvmm (2012-11-30th)

    Tye Fields,Julius Long,Lance Whitaker,Ewart Potgieter,Ben Moroz,Carl Chancellor,Gogea Mitu,
    Marcellus Brown,Wach,Ustinov,Tom Payne,Cully,John Rankin(224 cm),Tyson Fury,Skyler Anderson,Mazyck etc. are more talented fighters than Wladimir because they are taller.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  • Aswin Kini MK says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Tevi Lusa]
    #5450 Aswin Kini MK (2012-12-27th)

    Wow, you took Tomaz Adamek of Poland and compared him to Ali?????? Beautiful buddy… YOu beautifully explained Manny's commentary of the match – Vitali vs Adamek, yet still left out the key point – the commentators clearly stated that Adamek never looked like a natural 216 pounder??? Meaning he was a bloated cruiserweight whereas Ali was a natural 220 heavyweight… That is a huge difference. Btw, you said Adamek had 7 world heavyweight matches, but at what weight limit>>>> The only true heavyweights he fought were 1) Arreola, 2) Michael Grant, 3) Kevin Mcbride, and 4) Vitali…. OUt of these 4, he won 3 against 1) AN overrated and lazy Arreola, unpredictable Grant, and washed-up Mcbride….. None of these were champions!!!!

    I understand your concern on getting people to agree that Wladmir is an alltime great, but I donno why you keep pulling Ali into the picture. 1980 is not 2012…. When Ali was around, the average weight in Heavyweight boxing was around 200-215, when Wladmir started boxing, the average weight went upto 220-230.. I will discount the 240-260 pounders you mentioned because fat bums, whose normal weight is equal to their weight on fight night doesn't count. For example, Solis at 6 foot 1 inches should not be more than 220 pounds, yet weights around 260… At the same time, Sam Peter, who is 6 foot 3 should be ideally 220-225 on fight night, but weighs around 240….. Arreaola should be a fit 230 pounder, but instead comes to fight at a sloggish weight of 245+…

    Wladmir on the other hand is a solid 250 pounder; it is due to his hard workethic that he manages to keep his post-fight weight to 240-245 lbs…… Which is a very good quality in itself… I give him credit for that… But let's not compare too different eras. In Ali's era, blacks were lucky to gain food, let alone have a bulky physique…. In Klitschko's era, the nutrition levels have improved multi-fold, but boxers have remained lazy, boxing itself has become corrupt. Unless and until we have a time machine through which we can recall past heavyweights, subject them to today's modern training regimen, we can never judge which heavyweights are the best… Deal with it…. It is obnoxious to compare punching power with weight. I have personally seen martial artists, who weigh only 150 pounds, but can punch holes through a punching bag… I have seen 6 foot five inch tall people whose punches can hardly break solid cardboard planks… So your argument doesn't not prove or disprove anything… UNless you get a machine which measures the punching power of boxers and clearly states that Wladmir punched the hardest,your argument stands null and void…. Please bring us valid facts.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 4.5/5 (2 votes cast)
    • Honza says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Pyvo Redi]
      #5463 Honza (2013-01-03rd)

      Perfect my friend. I can actually see why author of theese articles almost never answer to you. He can not handle that you are right most of the time. :)

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
      • Tommo says:
        flag
        [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
        #5692 Tommo (2013-03-27th)

        He answers when he's being sensible. All I read here is 2 points of rubbish. 1: Adamek would still bash Ali, no way to prove it in facts but if you had to bet you wouldn't want to put it on Clay because you know you would lose money. 2: The bigger they are, the harder they hit, generally speaking. This IS a fact which has been proved definitively.

        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
        • Tommo says:
          flag
          [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
          #5695 Tommo (2013-03-27th)

          Admin DID leave out that Adamek's title bouts were cruiser fights though, I noticed as soon as I read that as well. His HW exp is not extensive. He is quick to expose and lay out complete facts in depth when it serves him but equally leaves out important details when it doesn't I must admit lol. You guys seem to be right on to that so I don't know why he does that!

          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    • Dan says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Dary Mose]
      #6894 Dan (2014-01-03rd)

      First, Ali was not a natural 220 pounder…he was a natural 185 pounder who got chubby in his later years. He put on 40 pounds in his career and did so without all these weight-gaining techniques that have come about over the past 30 years, so how did he do it? Yeah, through fat. He was essentially identical in size to Adamek and his power is also quite similar.

      "blacks were lucky to gain food"? Really? Ever see a picture of the Buster Mathis that Ali faced? Ever see the physique of the Joe Frazier who floored Ali? Those were pudgy black men.

      And punching power and weight DO have something to do with each other. It's not a "guy A weighs more than guy B so he automatically has a harder punch" but more of a "guy A is 20% bigger than guy B (185+20% is 222, which is very light for a heavyweight) so therefore he's likely to be stronger and more powerful." Plus, while my punch may be stronger when I hit the bag than the 220 pound guy I spar with (I'm 140-145…fight at 135), his shots have far more force behind them. Force = Mass*Acceleration…mass is important.

      And the "boxing itself has become corrupt" has got to be the most ignorant statement I've ever seen. Boxing wasn't corrupt when blacks weren't allowed to win titles? Boxing wasn't corrupt when the Mafia controlled the outcomes of many fights? Boxing wasn't corrupt when Ali cheated and used his NOI lackeys to gain advantages over his opponents? Boxing wasn't corrupt when Arum and King took over and ruined the popularity of the sport? Give me a break. Boxing is less corrupt today than it has ever been due to the presence of social media and former fighter turned promoters. If there's a bad decision today, there's a massive backlash…back in the "golden era", not so much.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  • Theo Netherland says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Zibu Kaxy]
    #5514 Theo Netherland (2013-02-17th)

    (The above comment of mine got accidentally placed too soon and should be removed)

    I've had a while ago a discussion with someone who said that Klitscko's success is merely based on their size. It's already stated here that size is not an argument to be held against them since HW's are supposed to be big. But if it were true that size is the main reason for their success than the opponents they'd beat shouldn't be able to beat other men of the Klitschko's size as well. Leave alone bigger size. They should lose always against men of similar size or bigger. Or almost always.

    So I've dun a little investigation to find out how the title opponents of the Klitschko's did against other big men. And I only took 6,6' fighters or bigger in consideration. Keep in mind that, according to boxrec, VK is 6,7' and WK 6,6'.

    Let's start with the title opponents of VK:

    Manuel Charr beat 6,7' Pedro Carrion while he couldn't even touch VK.

    Derck Chisora lost a split decision against 6'6,5' Robert Helenius. But he lost practically every round against VK.

    Thomasz Adamek was able to beat 6,7' Michael Grant and 6,6' Kevin McBride. He won practically every round. Against VK he wasn't even able to win one round.

    Odlanier Solis beat 6,6' Ray Austin nearly every round. And Kevin Burnett 6,6" got TKOed in eight. And Oleksiy Mazikin 6,5" got KOed in one. And he beat 7,1'Julius Long! But Solis got KOed in one by VK.

    Shannon Briggs KOed in one 6,7' Rafael Pedro and 6,6' Calvin Jones. But Briggs was unable to win even one round against VK.

    Kevin Johnson won against 7,1'Julius Long. Against VK he lost every round.

    Chris Arreola KOed 6,6'Jameel McCline in four. Against VK he lost every round.

    Samuel Peter won against 6,6'Jameel McCline. And he KOed in one 7,1'Julius Long. But there was not a single round he could win against VK.

    Danny Williams KOed in one 6,6'Joey Paladino. But he to couldn't produce one successful round against VK.

    Lennox Lewis KOed in two 6,7' Micheal Grant. Lewis was behind on points at time of stoppage, after the 6th round, against VK. In his whole career this only had happened once before. Against Frank Bruno that was.

    Chris Byrd won against 6,6' Jameel McCline. 6,7' Mike Rouse got KOed in six. Byrd is one of the very few that was able to win some rounds against VK. But VK was injured this fight.

    Obed Sullivan won against 6,6' Carlos Monroe and 6,6'James Gaines. But against VK he he didn't have one successful round.

    Ed Mahone Koed in one 6,6' Stan Jones. But he to didn't even win one round against VK.

    And now WK's record:

    Mariusz Wach Koed in six 6,8'Tye Fields. Koed in four 6,6' Kevin McBride. KO in seven for 7,1' Julius Long. And won against 6,9' Evgeny Orlov. It's clear that Wach, although a monster himself, had beat some monsters. But against WK he was not able to win one round.

    Tony Thompson TKOed 6,6' James Gaines. KO in one for 6,6,5' Lee Alhassan. He stood twice against WK and maybe had one round of success…

    David Haye beat 7,0' Nikolay Valuev. Haye, according to one judge, may have won against WK three rounds.

    Samuel Peter won against 6,6'Jameel McCline. And he KOed in one 7,1'Julius Long. He stood twice against WK, and even had him twice knocked down, but in the end he lost big.

    Eddie Chambers beat 6,7'Alexander Dimitrenko. But had no round of success against WK.

    Ruslan Chagaev beat 7,0' Nikolay Valuev. But had against WK not a round of success.

    Sultan Ibragimov KOed in seven 6,8' Lance Whitaker. He lost big against WK but may have won two rounds.

    Ray Austin beat 7,1' Julius Long. The same goes for 6,6' Grant Cudjoe and for 6,6 Wesley Smith. But it took WK two rounds to get rid of Austin.

    Calvin Brock won against 6,6' Jameel McCline. But lost every round against WK.

    Chris Byrd won against 6,6' Jameel McCline. 6,7' Mike Rouse got KOed in six. But had no round won against WK.

    Jameel McCline won over 6,8' Lance Whitaker and Koed in one 6,7'Micheal Grant. But lost all rounds against WK.

    Frans Boths beat 6,7,5'Timo Hoffmann. 6,6' Calvin Jones got Koed in two. But had no rounds won before being KOed by WK.

    Charles Shufford beat 7,0'Marcellus Brown. But no rounds did he win against WK.

    Derrick Jefferson KOed 6,6' Ed White. And he won over 7,1'Julius Long. But he got wiped away in two against WK.

    The records show, prove, that the opponents of the K's are very capable of beating men of the K's size. Or even of a much bigger size! And even knock them out! But against the K's they practically can't even win one round. This is a factual observation! Can't be denied! And I can only make the conclusion that size is not the major key to the K's success. Their title-opponents often have beaten easily guys of similar size or even bigger. So the Klitschko's success must depend on other quality's than size alone…

    Theo N

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • Admin says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Suva Mywo]
      #5515 Admin (2013-02-17th)

      A very nice list.

      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
      • Tommo says:
        flag
        [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
        #5693 Tommo (2013-03-27th)

        But Wladimir's opponents are worthless remember lol ;) (sarcasm to be noted)

        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  • Fuck monkey says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Toge Digu]
    #5535 f*ck monkey (2013-03-05th)

    1 nikolai valuev is NOT 6ft 2, 2 wladimir did knockout sameul peter. Are you saying this stuff about weight because you yourself are fat? And largely overweight?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  • Honza says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Bote Kitu]
    #5551 Honza (2013-03-13th)

    nice list but I have to point out some mistakes ok?
    Manuel Charr beat 6,7' Pedro Carrion while he couldn't even touch VK.
    Wrong. Vitali was not in very good chape and it was obvious that he had some problems with Charr.

    David Haye beat 7,0' Nikolay Valuev. Haye, according to one judge, may have won against WK three rounds.
    Yeah according to ONE judge: Wlad won 9 rouds because he hit air most of the time (his accuracy percentil of that fight is 26%).

    Shannon Briggs KOed in one 6,7' Rafael Pedro and 6,6' Calvin Jones. But Briggs was unable to win even one round against VK.
    You mean Briggs the mummy (he looked like mummy that night)? Guy who barrely beaten 48 old George Foreman and that Briggs who at his prime get his ass kicked by Lennox Lewis.

    Odlanier Solis beat 6,6' Ray Austin nearly every round. And Kevin Burnett 6,6" got TKOed in eight. And Oleksiy Mazikin 6,5" got KOed in one. And he beat 7,1'Julius Long! But Solis got KOed in one by VK.

    Yes 1st round Ko for Vitali right? It was as bad as Alis 1st round Ko against Liston. Solis had broken his ankle after glancy blow.

    Frans Boths beat 6,7,5'Timo Hoffmann. 6,6' Calvin Jones got Koed in two. But had no rounds won before being KOed by WK.
    botha lost via Ko to Lewis, Evander and Mike Tyson. Mike and Lewis even Koed him quicker than Wlad.

    As you can see. Some points are not very valid.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    • Tommo says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Jaky Ope]
      #5924 Tommo (2013-04-06th)

      Nice homework mate :) Like the style lol

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  • Aswin Kini MK says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Vixu Dawy]
    #6020 Aswin Kini MK (2013-04-12th)

    Puga Lyxo said:

    "He answers when he's being sensible. All I read here is 2 points of rubbish. 1: Adamek would still bash Ali, no way to prove it in facts but if you had to bet you wouldn't want to put it on Clay because you know you would lose money. 2: The bigger they are, the harder they hit, generally speaking. This IS a fact which has been proved definitively."

    "Adamek would still bash Ali", wow, you must have some confidence on Adamek's power. This guy has not even got a single KO over a legit Top10 heavyweight and you said that he would bash an alltime great easily. And all this considering that Adamek barely managed to win a fight against a crude slugger like Arreola. You wanna know what would have happened if Ali had ever managed to fight Adamek.. Watch his fight against Jerry Quarry.. and you will know..

    For heaven;s sake, do not compare a legit 210-215 pounder vs a blown-up cruiserweight like Adamek. Ali in mid 70s weighed around 210-215 pounds and was way faster than Adamek, way more talented, and had a solid chin. Your claims on him thrasing Ali are completely ridiculous.

    "The bigger they are, the harder they hit, generally speaking. This IS a fact which has been proved definitively."
    Did you just write an oxymoronic sentence. Adamek, even in his heaviest days, was no bigger than the 70s Ali. Adamek against Vitali weighed in about 216-220 pounds. Ali in his priime, weighed around the same weight. So, I am not sure what exactly you are trying to prove. Are you saying a legitimate 215 pounder punches weaker than a bloated 215 pounder?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    • Tommo says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Xupa Gyko]
      #6026 Tommo (2013-04-13th)

      No I certainly don't think Adamek would be going for a KO win against Ali so "bash" might be an overstatement. However Adamek is not the same challenge as Quarry who "as he was then" would not be allowed to box a real HW and was not same level as Adamek. Of course I have stretched Adamek in my previous statement to make Ali sound worse than he was. Lately I have tried to keep my comparitive scenario's more realistic. To be fair I feel the misleading statement I made here is no more ridiculous than some of the counter arguments I've heard in Ali's favour though. Adamek is a skilled boxer however and I do believe it would be a competitive fight for Ali, certainly more competitive than Ali/Quarry, but that's just me. I realise most people give him more credit, but I don't think his lack of proper defense would be very wise today.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

  • Write a comment

    :wink: :twisted: :roll: :oops: :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :evil: :cry: :arrow: :?: :-| :-x :-o :-P :-D :-? :-) :( :!: 8-O 8-)