By Anthony Mason: In the previous article, it was established beyond doubt that Vitali Klitschko had done nothing to establish himself as a legitimately great heavyweight by all-standards. Now, it is time to use the same unbiased, fair, 100% factual and contextual analysis to determine how great Wladimir Klitschko is. Wladimir, like his brother, is a good heavyweight, but for him to be great there are a few things that need to be present before the label of greatness can be put on him.
Similarly to the case with his brother, Wladimir is highly praised for being the third-longest reigning heavyweight champion of all time. Once again, these defenses have to be analyzed in detail to determine how truly valuable and impressive this competition is. If title defenses regardless of competition were the determinant of greatness, then Bernard Hopkins (although he is truly great) would be falsely considered the greatest middleweight of all time, ahead of Sugar Ray Robinson, Harry Greb, and Marvin Hagler thanks to Hopkins’ 20 title defenses. Actually, Bernard might be one of the top 5 fighters of all time according to this logic since almost nobody has 20 defenses in boxing history.
It is so ridiculous to consider a boxer one of the greatest ever simply based on statistics that are taken out of context. Instead of being blind sheep that follow the herd and mindlessly believing that title defenses and numbers, regardless of competition or context, make you great, we will be properly analyzing Wladimir’s career with common sense, unbiased, factual, and objective analysis.
Wladimir supposedly has 16 consecutive title defenses, putting him behind the great Joe Louis and Larry Holmes. That is great company to be with, but unfortunately Wladimir does not belong there. After analyzing Wladimir’s “defenses” we will see that the disparity between Wladimir and the greats is far more than just a few more title fights. Here is a breakdown of Wladimir’s best opposition
Chris Byrd – Only “notable” accomplishments are beating a washed up 40-year-old Evander Holyfield and an extremely limited David Tua. Tua and Byrd were both exposed by Ike Ibeabuchi.
Francois Botha – Washed up, past his prime, and he lost every big fight he was ever in.
Ray Mercer – Completely washed up and past his prime. Over 40 years old.
Samuel Peter – Only notable wins are barely squeaking out two close and controversial decisions over a washed up version of a natural middleweight in James Toney. The worst part is that it took Wladimir life and death to survive three knockdowns against a C-class heavyweight like Peter.
Hasim Rahman – completely washed up and past his prime.
Eddie Chambers – only “notable” win is a decision over a washed up C-class Sam Peter.
David Haye – a lot of hype, but little substance. Apparently, his wins over terrible opposition like a washed up John Ruiz, Nikolai Valuev, and Audley Harrison somehow make him a world-class heavyweight by all-time standards
Alexander Povetkin – never beat an elite fighter, unless you count a washed up Hasim Rahman. Wladimir resorted to excessive clinching, leaning, and cheating to win against this C-class heavyweight.
Ross Purity – out of 37 fights prior to fighting Wladimir, Purity only won 23. Wladimir lost to such an incredibly weak heavyweight.
Corrie Sanders – An incredibly weak heavyweight. Could not beat Hasim Rahman, and managed to destroy Wladimir. Unlike Lennox Lewis, Evander Holyfield, and Joe Louis, among others, who avenged their losses, Wladimir was never able to do so against Corrie Sanders or Ross Purity
Lamon Bewster – Brewster lost to Clifford Etienne. Etienne was such a weak heavyweight, he got knocked out in the first round of an extremely fat, out of shape, washed up Mike Tyson in the last win of Tyson’s career. Not only does this diminish Wladimir’s win over Brewster by a lot, but the fact that Wladimir was obliterated by Brewster at first completely ruins Wladimir’s chances of being considered a great heavyweight.
If Wladimir had beaten competition like Lennox Lewis did, then perhaps he could be excused. Lewis did get knocked out by a prime McCall and a prime Rahman, but he not only avenged those losses easily, he went on to beat some of the best heavyweight competition in boxing history, unlike Wladimir. Wladimir also infamously made up a false excuse to try and make up for Brewster’s exposure of Wladimir’s weak status as a heavyweight. Wladimir and his brother had the audacity to falsely propose that Wladimir had been poisoned. No evidence was ever found of such a false claim, just as no evidence has ever been found that Wladimir beat one opponent worthy of legitimizing him as a truly great or top 20 heavyweight. The only way Wladimir could have been poisoned is if Brewster laced his gloves and injected poison into Wladimir by punching him in the face repeatedly.
Not content with just one excuse, Wladimir tried to diminish Brewster’s victory by saying that excessive vaseline was applied to his body resulting in overheating. Perhaps when Wladimir suffers a heat stroke like Sugar Ray Robinson, he can be excused for losing, otherwise there is no way he can be let off the hook. I never heard Roy Jones making excuses when he outboxed an all-time great middleweight in Bernard Hopkins with a broken right hand. I never heard Ali diminishing Ken Norton’s victory based on his broken jaw.
Sure, men like Tyson lost to Buster Douglas. But at least men like Tyson beat the likes of prime Mike Spinks, an old but game Larry Holmes, Tony Tucker, and Razor Ruddock as well. None of these men, not even Buster Douglas, are as weak as Brewster, Sanders, or Purity. Aside from that, Mike Tyson was a Wilfred Benitez-like fighter in the sense that he peaked extremely early in his career. At the time of the Douglas fight he was mentally and physically deteriorating, and still managed to nearly knock him out. Wladimir had no such disadvantages against his weak competition, and was beaten in much worse fashion than Tyson against Douglas.
In Wladimir’s entire career, and in all of his “title defenses,” he never beat one remotely elite fighter. David Haye? Who has he beaten to be considered a historically elite heavyweight? Sam Peter? The man who in his prime needed two controversial decisions to squeak past a blown up and washed up middleweight? Ray Mercer? The 40 year old washed up senior citizen?
Just like with Vitali’s padded resume, Wladimir has no one on his career that can elevate his title reign near the likes of Joe Louis, Larry Holmes, Muhammad Ali, or even men such as Sonny Liston and Mike Tyson. It shocks me when people believe the farce that Joe Louis fought a Bum of the Month club. The likes of Max Schmeling, Jim Braddock, Jack Sharkey, Max Baer, Billy Conn, Jersey Joe Walcott, and Ezzard Charles are far from bums. The only people to epitomize a Bum of the Month club are the Klitschkos’ opponents, not Joe Louis’.
I recall a humorous incident in which the great Muhammad Ali was joking with the great Joe Louis. Ali stated that there was no way that he could have lost to Joe Louis. Louis then told Ali, “One time during my career I fought a Bum of the Month tour.” Ali asked, “I would have been a bum compared to you?” Louis simply replied, “Well, you’d be on the tour.”
Obviously Joe Louis was simply joking with Ali. However, if he were talking to Wladimir or Vitali Klitschko in this instance it would not be a joke. Both Klitschkos would be, and are, bums in comparison to Louis (a giant killer), Liston, Ali, Holmes, Norton, Young, Foreman, Tyson, Holyfield, Bowe, and Lennox – which we witnessed in front of our own eyes – or any legitimately great heavyweight. The media today should apologize on behalf of the media in Louis’ day, and instead label the Klitschkos’ careers as one huge Bum of the Month club to make up for the disrespect of a true champion and great heavyweight like Joe Louis.
Nowhere on Wladimir’s career do we see the even B-quality opponents, let alone A-class opponents that are present on the resumes of great champions such as Ezzard Charles, Jack Dempsey, Joe Walcott, Archie Moore, Sam Langford, Harry Wills, Sam McVey, Jack Johnson, Gene Tunney and many more. It is true that these men would not be heavyweights by today’s standards, but obviously when ranking heavyweights by all-time standards, it has to be done with the same principles as a pound for pound ranking. If there were Bum of the Month heavyweights with limited skill such as Brewster, Sanders, Purity, and Peter who all gave Wladimir huge problems, a similarly sized opponent with the pound for pound skills of a Joe Walcott, Jack Dempsey, or Ezzard Charles would destroy either Klitschko, especially if you factor in modern nutrition and conditioning.
Imagine if a modern heavyweight of today’s size, perhaps 230 to 240 pounds and around 6’ 2” to 6’ 4”, with modern training and nutrition had the ability and skills to set a trap on Wladimir the same way that Jersey Joe Walcott set up Ezzard Charles prior to his famous knockout. Wladimir would be obliterated even worse than what Brewster did to him. The results would be so shocking that Wladimir and his brother might once again falsely accuse someone of poisoning him.
Fortunately for Wladimir, no modern heavyweight today has the pound for pound skills of an Ezzard Charles or Jersey Joe Walcott, and he is able to feast on his Bum of the Month opposition. Just because past heavyweights are smaller than modern heavyweights does not mean that their skills and all-time ranking are not better than the modern heavyweights. Again, when ranking smaller heavyweights like Langford, Wills, Johnson, Dempsey, Tunney, etc., it is necessary to factor in that the definition of a heavyweight changes based on eras. Comparing extremely small heavyweights of the past to modern heavyweights needs to be done with the same basis as pound for pound rankings.
For example, either Klitschko at heavyweight would obviously destroy Floyd Mayweather, especially when Mayweather barely got past smaller B-class fighters like Maidana (Roger Mayweather himself stated that Maidana beat nobody impressive) and Castillo (who got robbed in the first fight). However, Mayweather is obviously the better pound for pound fighter than the Klitschkos despite being smaller. For this reason, the likes of Dempsey, Wills, Langford, McVey, Johnson, Walcott, etc. have every right to be ranked higher than the Klitschkos as heavyweights despite being smaller, because the definition of a heavyweight is relative and dependent on one’s time period.
Heavyweights used to be smaller, but they were far more skilled and fought much better competition and against greater odds. I have never seen Vitali or Wladimir been able to counter someone the way Walcott dropped Joe Louis or Ezzard Charles. They have never overcome obstacles like Sam Langford did, fighting the likes of Jack Johnson, Harry Wills, Joe Jeanette, and Sam McVey when Langford was a former lightweight. I have never seen elusiveness and masterful counterpunching from the Klitschkos that you can see in Ezzard Charles or Archie Moore.
Size is the ONLY reason for the Klitschkos’ success. Not their skill. If being a great heavyweight champion consisted of only using good jabs and right hands, being unable to fight on the inside against a competent opponent (Vitali vs Lewis, and Wladimir in general), illegal and excessive clinching and leaning (Wladimir vs Povetkin), and getting stopped by three D-class fighters (Wladimir) and a 38 year old man far past his best (Vitali) then there would be about a hundred heavyweights in history that could be considered historically great. When the Klitschkos are not fooling people into thinking they are amongst the most skilled heavyweights of all time, (although they are highly skilled, but not to that degree) they are easily exposed.
James Toney is not one of these people. One of the greatest weight climbers and technically sound boxers in the sport’s history, Toney accurately stated it was embarrassing for Wladimir to call himself a heavyweight champion. I still do not think it is as embarrassing as the state of the heavyweight division, where a natural middleweight (and a great one at that) can eat his way to heavyweight and get two controversial decisions against Sam Peter, who in this weak era was considered one of the top-level heavyweights. In any competitive era, Peter would never come close to a title shot. Yet, this is the greatest opponent that either Klitschko beat.
As another example, the great heavyweights such as Louis, Holmes, Foreman, Holyfield, Tyson, and Ali were able to make adjustments when technical boxing did not work. The Klitschkos are completely dependent on robotic and technical repetition of their jabs and right hands. With Wladimir, excessive cheating, leaning, and clinching that would make even Jack Johnson shocked are also factored in the equation. When prime Vitali’s robotic technique did not work against the washed up past prime 38-year-old Lewis, he was unable to make adjustments and had his face bashed in. Wladimir was unable to adjust against the likes of Brewster, Sanders, and Purity. Wladimir was fortunate to survive against the C-class Sam Peter, but you know what they say. A blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then.
The great champions, however, are not in the same boat. Joe Louis repeatedly came off the canvas to defeat his opponents and adjusted after textbook boxing did not work. Holmes was able to make adjustments to defeat Ken Norton and Earnie Shavers when strictly textbook boxing would not have worked. George Foreman had to make adjustments to time the faster Michael Moorer, who was dominating him. Holyfield was able to mix it up against Bowe when things were not working well. While Vitali was busy quitting on the stool, Evander was too busy fighting Michael Moorer to the final bell with the same injury on top of a heart condition. A past prime version of Tyson adjusted to defeat Francois Botha. Muhammad Ali is perhaps the heavyweight king of making adjustments against the likes of Liston, Foreman, Frazier, and Norton (in the first rematch at least). The Klitschkos, unlike the best, failed to adjust when it was necessary to get them out of trouble.
If Wladimir can be considered great after getting knocked out by three D-class fighters, then Floyd Patterson must be unbelievably great. After all, instead of getting knocked out by Brewster or Sanders, he was getting knocked out by Ingemar Johansen, Sonny Liston, and Muhammad Ali. And Patterson actually beat good competition like Johansen and Bonavena on top of that.
If Vitali can be considered great for getting stopped by a 38 year old worst shape of his life Lennox Lewis, then Michael Moorer has to be even greater. After all, Moorer didn’t just have a slim two-point lead after only six rounds against an old and past his prime George Foreman. Moorer was completely dominating the fight for nine rounds before he got knocked out. He was beating an old and past prime George Foreman much more decisively and over the course of three more rounds than Vitali, who was clinging on for dear life against an old and past prime Lennox Lewis.
Obviously, I do not believe that Floyd Patterson or Michael Moorer can be ranked higher than the Klitschkos. I made this ludicrous comparison to prove that people cannot apply objective logic for ranking champions like Moorer and Patterson, and then disregard the same exact logic and reasoning for the Klitschkos. Boxers needs to be ranked based on competition and with their failures taken into account, and it has to apply to everyone, the Klitschkos are no exception.
A solid or simply good heavyweight like Gerry Cooney could easily walk through the likes of Chris Byrd, David Haye, or Sam Peter. I highly doubt anyone would consider Cooney to be an all-time great. If he were fighting in this era and accumulated 16 meaningless defenses on a Bum of the Month tour, should he be placed amongst the greatest heavyweights? Absolutely not.
With proper contextual analysis, it is obvious that Wladimir’s defenses are far from legitimate. They are simply an excuse used by blind sheep that follow the herd to validate his status as an all-time top 20 heavyweight. People need to put irrelevant information such as W-L ratios or KO percentages in context, otherwise Deontay Wilder should already be considered one of the greatest. Likewise, title defenses are only valuable if they come against legitimate competition, not the Bum of the Month Club that the Klitschkos go against. Mike Tyson has only one less consecutive title defense than Muhammad Ali, and although Tyson is a very good heavyweight, it is ridiculous to rank his wins as highly as Muhammad Ali’s.
The Klitschkos are like the Wilt Chamberlain of the boxing world. For those who do not know, Wilt Chamberlain was a basketball player who competed in the NBA from the late 50s to the early 70s. Wilt Chamberlain put up ridiculous statistics in the first half of his career, averaging 50 points a game and 25 rebounds a game at one point, statistics that have not been matched since. This is similar to how the Klitschkos accumulated high knockout percentages and many title defenses. However, when Wilt’s accomplishments were put in context, just as we did with the Klitschkos, he was far from the caliber of a more modern player such as a Michael Jordan or Hakeem Olajuwon.
Wilt Chamberlain competed in an era where there were only eight teams in the NBA, compared to almost thirty in the 90s. Also, Wilt had the benefit of playing when the NBA was barely a decade old and still in the early stage of development. For example, the league at the time consisted of players chucking up a much larger numbers of shots than today, and those shots were made at an extremely lower percentage than the shooting percentage in the league today. (Professional boxing has been around at least a half-century longer than the NBA; so old-time boxers’ accomplishments cannot be disregarded by the same logic since boxing has developed as a sport since the late 19th century). Like Wilt Chamberlain competing against eight teams compared the 80s and 90s era of nearly thirty, the Klitschkos have the benefit of fighting in an era with zero elite contenders, compared to Ali’s era where you had Liston, Patterson, Quarry, Ellis, Bonavena, Frazier, Norton, Shavers, Foreman, Young, and Holmes.
Wilt’s physical skills were ahead of his time and he was able to easily dominate a league full of much smaller and weaker men, just like the Klitschkos dominate today’s weak era of heavyweight boxing. Despite all of these advantages, Chamberlain only won two championships in fourteen years, and his playoff performances (when the competition is the toughest) were dreadful compared to his usual output. Chamberlain competed in five NBA championships, and only once was he the leading scorer, albeit in a losing effort. Similarly, the only time that a Klitschko fought top-level competition in Lennox Lewis, albeit a shot past prime version of him, he was exposed badly just like Wilt Chamberlain was repeatedly exposed in the playoffs against the top competition of his still extremely weak era. Even before the league expanded, the Boston Celtics, led by Bill Russell, another beneficiary of a weak era (just like Chamberlain and the Klitschkos) repeatedly ousted Wilt Chamberlain. Just like the prime Vitali could not handle a washed up past his prime Lennox Lewis, Wilt Chamberlain could not hang with the best team in only a small eight team sample. Imagine if Wilt had to play the top 5 teams in a 32-team sample of today’s game. Similarly, imagine if Vitali or Wladimir had to fight several opponents of Lennox Lewis’ caliber, especially if the opponents were in their prime.
As the league expanded and more talent entered, Wilt’s performance took a complete nosedive. Wilt Chamberlain did have a good well-rounded arsenal even by today’s standards. His moves and skills were good, but many players since his day have by far surpassed him fundamentally. Chamberlain could not hit a basket outside of a 10-foot range to save his life, but that did not bother him as he had a wonderful time competing against competition similar to the Bum of the Month opposition of the Klitschkos. After the development of the NBA, however, he no longer had the benefit of playing against unskilled and extremely undersized opponents (fortunately for the the Klitschkos, they never had to worry about this outside of Lennox Lewis).
Wilt Chamberlain never again came close to his old numbers. After only seven years in the league, a time where many players are just beginning to reach their prime, Wilt could not scrape 25 points a game or even 20 rebounds a game. The slight addition of talent and the slowly developing league caught up to Chamberlain and he was proven to be a still really good player, but far from the unstoppable behemoth that competed against weak competition in the 50s and early 60s. He was exposed by the next generation of stars in the form of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, (just like Wladimir and Vitali were exposed in their losses) who knocked Wilt Chamberlain out of the playoffs almost every year.
After Wilt Chamberlain’s time, the league adopted many complex rules for the likes of Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, and Larry Bird to deal with and overcome (on top of any rule changes that took place in Chamberlain’s time), and the increase in the level of competition and fundamental skills combined with these rules made the league since the late 1970s light-years beyond the stone age version of basketball that Wilt Chamberlain competed in. Wilt’s failures even without the disadvantage of the more complex rules proved that despite being very good, he is nowhere near the level of the best in NBA history.
With heavyweight boxing, unfortunately, the reverse has happened. Instead of the heavyweight division getting better and better, it has regressed horribly. In the days of Louis, Liston, Ali, Holmes, Tyson, Holyfield, and Lewis, the level of competition and boxing skill was unbelievably high. With such high competition, the only men to accumulate twenty or more defenses were Holmes and Louis.
It is a sad day in heavyweight boxing when the Ken Nortons, Jimmy Youngs, Max Schmelings, Ezzard Charles, Mike Spinks, and Riddick Bowes of the heavyweight scene are long gone. In today’s Wilt Chamberlain-like era, the Klitschkos’ Bum of the Month club has replaced these great opponents. As a result, the way has been paved for the Klitschkos to do what Wilt Chamberlain did in basketball – dominate one of the weakest eras of the sport’s history under a false pretense of being among the greatest. That is how history will always remember these men, regardless of what anyone else says.
Comments are closed.