Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > General Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-27-2007, 09:42 AM   #16
Asterion
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,879
vCash: 75
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAMPAGE0017
How's that possible? Wladimir was pretty much universally recognized as the " heir to the throne " and then he get's shockingly defeated by Sanders. I don't see how Byrd could've been number 2.
Nope, Byrd was #2, trust me.

The Ring decided that the winner of Vitali/Sanders was going to be their new Champ because:

-It was a fight for the WBC belt, and Sanders was also the WBO beltholder who had to relinquish it.

-Sanders had defeated the #1 in Wlad.

-Byrd was inactive or involved in controversial decisions at the time.
Asterion is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 06-27-2007, 09:59 AM   #17
RAMPAGE0017
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 814
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterion
Nope, Byrd was #2, trust me.

The Ring decided that the winner of Vitali/Sanders was going to be their new Champ because:

-It was a fight for the WBC belt, and Sanders was also the WBO beltholder who had to relinquish it.

-Sanders had defeated the #1 in Wlad.

-Byrd was inactive or involved in controversial decisions at the time.

If Wlad was #1, and Sanders defeated him, then that makes Sanders #1, right? I just don't see where Byrd fits into the equation other than the fact that he had a belt. And Ring doesn't award the belts out unless the divisions number one and two competitors fight. And seeing as how Sanders never legitimately lost the WBO title, that should pretty much make his fight with Klitschko a unification. Sanders deserves props for that, too.... he basically told the WBO to go **** themselves in order to actually make things happen in the HW division.

Last edited by RAMPAGE0017; 06-27-2007 at 10:01 AM.
RAMPAGE0017 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 10:07 AM   #18
Asterion
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,879
vCash: 75
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAMPAGE0017
If Wlad was #1, and Sanders defeated him, then that makes Sanders #1, right?
Not always. If Sanders had been a Top10 contender before fighting Wlad, and then defeated Wlad...then he could have been #1. But Sanders was unranked. Beating the #1 doesn't always make you the #1.

If Sprott defeated Wlad tomorrow, would you rank Sprott as #1?


Quote:
Originally Posted by RAMPAGE0017
I just don't see where Byrd fits into the equation other than the fact that he had a belt. And Ring doesn't award the belts out unless the divisions number one and two competitors fight.
Ehh, read the rules. The Ring awards their belt to the winner of fights between #1 and #2 contenders and also -in some cases determined by them- between #1 and #3.

One of this cases was Vitali-Sanders, others were Vasquez-Larios and Calzagher-Lacy.


Quote:
And seeing as how Sanders never legitimately lost the WBO title, that should pretty much make his fight with Klitschko a unification. Sanders deserves props for that, too.... he basically told the WBO to go **** themselves in order to actually make things happen in the HW division.
I agree.
Asterion is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 10:20 AM   #19
RAMPAGE0017
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 814
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterion
Not always. If Sanders had been a Top10 contender before fighting Wlad, and then defeated Wlad...then he could have been #1. But Sanders was unranked. Beating the #1 doesn't always make you the #1.

If Sprott defeated Wlad tomorrow, would you rank Sprott as #1?
Point taken. I guess it's a pretty open debate, but didn't Ring actually rank Sanders in the top 2 after defeating Wladimir?




Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterion
Ehh, read the rules. The Ring awards their belt to the winner of fights between #1 and #2 contenders and also -in some cases determined by them- between #1 and #3.
Alright, but in that case, even IF Sanders was only ranked third in the division, that still makes the fight for Ring's title legit. And let's be honest.. after Vitali stepped on Johnson, Sanders was pretty much the only real threat out there.... and everyone knew that Ruiz and Byrd would most likely have been crushed as well, so I guess they wanted to save everyone the headache of having to actually wait for a full unification. But all in all, I have to say.... this was one of the most unusual points in the division's history.
RAMPAGE0017 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 10:34 AM   #20
Asterion
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,879
vCash: 75
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Alright, but in that case, even IF Sanders was only ranked third in the division, that still makes the fight for Ring's title legit. And let's be honest.. after Vitali stepped on Johnson, Sanders was pretty much the only real threat out there....
That's why I said, on my first post, that I consider Vitali the man at HW during 2004/2005. Not Lineal Champ, but Champ just like Marvin Hart or Tommy Burns were Champs. And like Ezzard Charles during 1949-1950 or Larry Holmes between 1979-1980 (before defeating shot Louis and shot Ali).

I'm sure and I remember that Byrd was #2 at that time, but he was barely winning fights (Oquendo, Golota, McCline were close or controversial) and Don King wasn't risking his beltholders against Vitali.
Asterion is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 10:38 AM   #21
RAMPAGE0017
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 814
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asterion
That's why I said, on my first post, that I consider Vitali the man at HW during 2004/2005. Not Lineal Champ, but Champ just like Marvin Hart or Tommy Burns were Champs. And like Ezzard Charles during 1949-1950 or Larry Holmes between 1979-1980 (before defeating shot Louis and shot Ali).

I'm sure and I remember that Byrd was #2 at that time, but he was barely winning fights (Oquendo, Golota, McCline were close or controversial) and Don King wasn't risking his beltholders against Vitali.

Wow.. I'm surprised Byrd was ranked that high.
RAMPAGE0017 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 11:10 AM   #22
RAMPAGE0017
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 814
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

So to those of you who didn't consider Vitali the legit champion, what did Vitali have to do further in order for you to have considered him the true champ?
RAMPAGE0017 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 11:11 AM   #23
Thread Stealer
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 18,189
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

No.

I didn't consider him the true champ despite what The Ring magazine or HBO said.

I would have made Vitali a favorite in a rematch over Byrd and the other top heavyweights at the time.

But that's why guys fight. It's not about speculation.
Thread Stealer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 11:12 AM   #24
Bad_Intentions
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Miami FL, USA
Posts: 3,688
vCash: 153
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sand

no.
Bad_Intentions is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 11:14 AM   #25
RAMPAGE0017
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 814
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erratic Behavior
No.

I didn't consider him the true champ despite what The Ring magazine or HBO said.

I would have made Vitali a favorite in a rematch over Byrd and the other top heavyweights at the time.

But that's why guys fight. It's not about speculation.

So basically a win over Byrd would have made him legit, in your opinion? And just out of curiousity, aside from Byrd.. who else did you consider to be a " top " heavyweight?
RAMPAGE0017 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 11:21 AM   #26
Thread Stealer
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 18,189
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAMPAGE0017
So basically a win over Byrd would have made him legit, in your opinion? And just out of curiousity, aside from Byrd.. who else did you consider to be a " top " heavyweight?
Yeah, Byrd. Probably Ruiz (ugh) as well. After losing to Roy, he beat Rahman, who was coming off a draw (which should have been a win) over Tua. Tua was on a good streak before fighting fat Rahman.

Vitali jumped too much in The Ring's rankings IMO. He went from #10 to #4 for LOSING to Lennox Lewis. How many guys go up 6 rankings for giving a tough fight by losing fairly to the champion? Then he went from #4 to #1 for beating Kirk Johnson, a guy who was in the middle (or lower end) of the top 10 and whose last fight against a heavyweight of note (old Savarese does not count), he DQ'd his way to defeat.

More fights were needed to establish a true champion, but the Ring jumped the gun, probably anxious to annoint anyone the heavyweight champion.
Thread Stealer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 11:24 AM   #27
RAMPAGE0017
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 814
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erratic Behavior
Yeah, Byrd. Probably Ruiz (ugh) as well. After losing to Roy, he beat Rahman, who was coming off a draw (which should have been a win) over Tua. Tua was on a good streak before fighting fat Rahman.

Vitali jumped too much in The Ring's rankings IMO. He went from #10 to #4 for LOSING to Lennox Lewis. How many guys go up 6 rankings for giving a tough fight by losing fairly to the champion? Then he went from #4 to #1 for beating Kirk Johnson, a guy who was in the middle (or lower end) of the top 10 and whose last fight against a heavyweight of note (old Savarese does not count), he DQ'd his way to defeat.

More fights were needed to establish a true champion, but the Ring jumped the gun, probably anxious to annoint anyone the heavyweight champion.

After Sanders whooped Wladimir, Ring probably figured that Vitali was the only likely heir apparent at the time.... and they were probably right.
RAMPAGE0017 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 11:25 AM   #28
jimmie
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Posts: 8,359
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

No cause I didnt rank Sanders in the top 3 or even 5 he hadnt beat anyone aside from that 1 fight with Wlad and that wasnt enough for me. I had Klitschko ranked 2nd in my ratings because he looked good vs Lewis and destroyed Kirk Johnson which at that time was a big deal. Byrd was number 1 and they didnt fight each other.
jimmie is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 11:29 AM   #29
rekcutnevets
Black Sash
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: InYourMouth, NC
Posts: 6,552
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sand

I would have given him the nod with one win over another claimant.

While losing to Lewis, Vitali proved that he was a top contender. Afterwards, he defeated Johnson, Sanders and Danny Williams. These wins were enough to hold on to his top contender status, but not enough to claim king of the division status. He really needed a win over someone like Byrd to claim the title.

Wladimir lost to Sanders, and Brewster then didn't look too great againtst Williamson. Wladimir has since gone on and won his next 5 fights. His wins over Peter, Byrd, and Brock are more impressive than the fighters Vitali had beaten in his last three outings.

So I will accept Wladimir now, but not his brother before him.
rekcutnevets is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 11:30 AM   #30
Thread Stealer
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 18,189
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAMPAGE0017
After Sanders whooped Wladimir, Ring probably figured that Vitali was the only likely heir apparent at the time.... and they were probably right.
What does figuring that someone is the likely heir apparent have to do with ranking a guy too highly? Jumping up six rankings from #10 to #4 for fairly losing a tough fight to the champion, and then going from #4 to #1 for beating a middle or lower-end top 10 guy is too much.
Thread Stealer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > General Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013