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 06-29-2007, 03:39 AM   #61
cuchulain
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Muirthemne
Posts: 10,611
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyP
No--I didn't because they leap frogged Byrd at the time. Byrd was on a huge winning streak and was 1-2 for quite awhile. As I recall, he was suppose to get a shot at Lewis but Lewis dropped the title so Byrd fought Holyfield for it. Byrd had a win over VK so how he could be leap frogged at that time was a joke. The Ring jumped the gun on this one.


JoeyP
Byrd lost to Wlad, Twice.

And he was being schooled by Vitali (8 rounds to 1) in their fight, until Vitali tore his shoulder and lost (technically)


Byrd's chance would have been very slim against a healthy Vitali.
cuchulain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 06-29-2007, 07:40 AM   #62
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?

Everybody's made good points on both sides so far, but I dunno.... Wladimir was seen as the top heavyweight in the world ( after Lewis ) at the time, and got convincingly spanked by Sanders. So not only did Sanders have a win over one of the very top fighters at the time, but it also made him a title holder, so it seems like it should be enough to consider Vitali the legit champ ( IMO, anyway ) since he not only beat a champ, but also won the WBC title in the process. As for Byrd, he may have been on a win streak, but like others have said he had a lot of dubious decisions. And Ruiz was fresh off of his loss to Roy Jones, so it's understandable that many didn't look upon those two as a " threat ".
RAMPAGE0017 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 10:03 AM   #63
JoeyP
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 191
vCash: 1090
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sand

Quote:
Originally Posted by cuchulain
Byrd lost to Wlad, Twice.

And he was being schooled by Vitali (8 rounds to 1) in their fight, until Vitali tore his shoulder and lost (technically)


Byrd's chance would have been very slim against a healthy Vitali.

Byrd's second loss to WK has nothing to do with this. Also--it really doesn't matter WHY or HOW Byrd beat VK, it's just the fact that he did. So it has to be taken into consideration.
JoeyP is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 10:17 AM   #64
Heavyrighthand
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,994
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sand

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyP
Byrd's second loss to WK has nothing to do with this. Also--it really doesn't matter WHY or HOW Byrd beat VK, it's just the fact that he did. So it has to be taken into consideration.
That's how I see it, too. Byrd got the win over Vitali, and so Byrd should be given the ranking boost from it, regardless of how decisive, or not, the win was.

A win is a win, to me.
Heavyrighthand is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 10:30 AM   #65
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 Sand

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavyrighthand
That's how I see it, too. Byrd got the win over Vitali, and so Byrd should be given the ranking boost from it, regardless of how decisive, or not, the win was.

A win is a win, to me.
Yeah, a win is a win, but he shouldn't get a boost in the ranks just because Vitali himself had climbed up the rankings. After all.. he did lose to Wladimir right after he fought Vitali.
RAMPAGE0017 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 10:39 AM   #66
DamonD
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Tavistock, England
Posts: 7,150
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

I have more of an issue with how The Ring handled Sanders' ranking than Vitali's...

Sanders was semi-retired, completely unranked, then after beating Wladimir he's suddenly #3. Then he takes on Vitali, has an 8th round tough TKO loss, getting stopped on his feet and never getting knocked down...and blammo, they completely drop him out of their top 10.

Total yo-yo stuff.
DamonD is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 10:55 AM   #67
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 DamonD
I have more of an issue with how The Ring handled Sanders' ranking than Vitali's...

Sanders was semi-retired, completely unranked, then after beating Wladimir he's suddenly #3. Then he takes on Vitali, has an 8th round tough TKO loss, getting stopped on his feet and never getting knocked down...and blammo, they completely drop him out of their top 10.

Total yo-yo stuff.

You have to also take into account that he won the WBO title, as well. At the very LEAST he should have been put into the top 4.
RAMPAGE0017 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 11:21 AM   #68
cuchulain
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Muirthemne
Posts: 10,611
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sand

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyP
Byrd's second loss to WK has nothing to do with this. Also--it really doesn't matter WHY or HOW Byrd beat VK, it's just the fact that he did. So it has to be taken into consideration.

Yes it DOES matter how he lost when trying to determine how a future bout would go.

If a 'nobody' is playing Pete Sampras and is losing two sets two zero and it's five zero in the third, and Pete goes over on his ankle, tears it and can't continue, he loses and the 'nobody ' wins, technically.

But Eveyone knows how he win and few would expect him to beat a healthy Sampras.

Byrd lost eight rounds. He couldn't get near Vitali. Because of Byrd's considerable skills, he avoided the fate of ALL bBUT ONE previous Vitali opponent, being KOd.

For that I give him credit, but hoping for another Vitali injury in a second bout is a risky strategy.

Vitali was the top dog when he beat Sanders, but only for a short time.
cuchulain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 11:30 AM   #69
Thread Stealer
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 18,222
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAMPAGE0017
See, that's my point though.... Vitali did fight a top 3 heavyweight, and won the Ring belt. And this particular heavyweight was a title holder himself. But, you already stated that you felt that he should've defeated atleast Byrd in order to truly be recognized as the true champion, and I was just curious as to your stance on the subject. But the fact is.. if Sanders was a top 3 heavyweight, then Vitali did legitimately win the Ring title.
Vitali legitimiately won based on their rules (#1 vs. #3 in some instances), but Vitali jumped too high in the ratings. Putting up a tough fight but losing (fairly) to the champion shouldn't get you a jump of 6 spots.
Thread Stealer is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 01:39 PM   #70
JoeyP
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 191
vCash: 1090
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

It's my understanding that he actually jumped up several places after LOSING to Lewis. Over fighters who hadn't lost! I think that's the most amazing thing. I think he was 8-10 and then LOST to Lewis and suddenly he is a top 5 and then he takes over #1 by beatingKirk---all the while leapfrogging Byrd who he did lose to. VK has been rewarded more than anyone in recent memory by losing a fight--and losing by TKO at that.

JoeyP
JoeyP is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 01:45 PM   #71
JoeyP
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 191
vCash: 1090
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sand

Quote:
Originally Posted by cuchulain
Yes it DOES matter how he lost when trying to determine how a future bout would go.

If a 'nobody' is playing Pete Sampras and is losing two sets two zero and it's five zero in the third, and Pete goes over on his ankle, tears it and can't continue, he loses and the 'nobody ' wins, technically.

But Eveyone knows how he win and few would expect him to beat a healthy Sampras.

Byrd lost eight rounds. He couldn't get near Vitali. Because of Byrd's considerable skills, he avoided the fate of ALL bBUT ONE previous Vitali opponent, being KOd.

For that I give him credit, but hoping for another Vitali injury in a second bout is a risky strategy.

Vitali was the top dog when he beat Sanders, but only for a short time.


The thing is, I'm not trying to determine how a future fight would go. I am basing rankings and who deserves what by IN THE RING decisions. He lost the fight. No matter how you spin it, no matter how you can try to explain it away he lost. If you quit, there's nothing technical about it. Not only did he lose to Byrd, he also received a huge bump in the ranking when he LOST to Lewis. Leapfrogging guys who had not lost in the same time frame. I still hold to my point that because Byrd had not lost in a while, and because he did have a win over VK, and because he remained a top ranked 1 or 2 over quite a bit of time, there's no way The Ring should have given out their belt without Byrd at least being involved someway. A healthy VK beats a healty Byrd the majority of the time--but that's why they fight--let them prove it in the ring.

JoeyP
JoeyP is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 01:48 PM   #72
cuchulain
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Muirthemne
Posts: 10,611
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sanders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyP
It's my understanding that he actually jumped up several places after LOSING to Lewis. Over fighters who hadn't lost! I think that's the most amazing thing. I think he was 8-10 and then LOST to Lewis and suddenly he is a top 5 and then he takes over #1 by beatingKirk---all the while leapfrogging Byrd who he did lose to. VK has been rewarded more than anyone in recent memory by losing a fight--and losing by TKO at that.

JoeyP
Joey, sometimes a boxer's standing goes up with a loss, depending on how they perform, especially if it's to the undisputed best on the planet and they are leading at the point of stoppage (on cuts with half the fight gone).

RING may have felt, based on Vitali's record and his performance that no-one other than Lewis (who had retired, rather than rematch him) would be favoured to beat him head to head, hence their ranking.
cuchulain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 03:00 PM   #73
JoeyP
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 191
vCash: 1090
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sand

Quote:
Originally Posted by cuchulain
Joey, sometimes a boxer's standing goes up with a loss, depending on how they perform, especially if it's to the undisputed best on the planet and they are leading at the point of stoppage (on cuts with half the fight gone).

RING may have felt, based on Vitali's record and his performance that no-one other than Lewis (who had retired, rather than rematch him) would be favoured to beat him head to head, hence their ranking.

Ok--fine--give me a few more examples then of how someone in the HW division moved up in rankings by losing to the current champ. Could it be a remote possibility that they felt VK would sell more magazines?

Look--I agree that right after Lewis retired VK was the best in the division. But crowning him because I THINK that he would win is completely unfair to the rest of the other belt holders at the time, esp when one of those beltholders does in fact have a win over VK.

Joey
JoeyP is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 05:47 PM   #74
cuchulain
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Muirthemne
Posts: 10,611
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sand

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyP
Ok--fine--give me a few more examples then of how someone in the HW division moved up in rankings by losing to the current champ. Could it be a remote possibility that they felt VK would sell more magazines?

Look--I agree that right after Lewis retired VK was the best in the division. But crowning him because I THINK that he would win is completely unfair to the rest of the other belt holders at the time, esp when one of those beltholders does in fact have a win over VK.

Joey

I'm not going to debate this any more. We've reached an impasse.

I understand your position perfectly and it's just as valid as mine.

You could make the case either way (and between us, we have).

I was trying to explain what might have been in the minds of the RING guys (always a difficult thing to do) when they made their list.

I believe Vitali was the top dog for a little while and would have done much more but for injuries. I believe that it's ludicrous to suggest that he feared Rahman (as some on these threads have) when he took on Lennox. Vitali would probably have KO'd Rahman earlier than Lennox did.

I understand and respect your points.


Regards.
cuchulain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2007, 06:07 PM   #75
Heavyrighthand
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,994
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Did anyone accept VITALI as the legitimate heavyweight champion when he beat Sand

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyP
Ok--fine--give me a few more examples then of how someone in the HW division moved up in rankings by losing to the current champ. Could it be a remote possibility that they felt VK would sell more magazines?

Look--I agree that right after Lewis retired VK was the best in the division. But crowning him because I THINK that he would win is completely unfair to the rest of the other belt holders at the time, esp when one of those beltholders does in fact have a win over VK.

Joey
I agree, he should not have gained ANY rankings boost by losing to Lewis, even if it was a valliant effort he put up. A loss is a loss, and should not be rewarded with any rise in ranking, whatsoever. That's how I see it.

But I think Vitali got his big rankings boost by taking out Johnson, who was a top three contender at the time he was beaten by Vitali. Not absolutely sure, but I think that is correct.


The Johnson win got him a boost in rankings, and then Vitali beating Sanders made him THE man, cause after Sanders KOed Wlad, Sanders was the man to beat. And Vitali certianly beat the hell out of him.

Last edited by Heavyrighthand; 06-29-2007 at 06:17 PM.
Heavyrighthand 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 12:54 PM.


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