Is Ross Purrity the only man to fight both Klitschkos and not lose?

Is Ross Purrity the only man to fight both Klitschkos and not lose?

He clearly beat Vlad and in his fight against Vitalihe was only stopped by a cut which was only caused by punches and a pathetic cut it was
http://wn.com/Vitali_Klitschko_vs_Ross_Purrity_Final_Round

imagine if Vitali was ever stopped on a cut so small ......

Any way it appears that if you have a cut 10 times more serious than Purritys [ie Vit V Lewis] it doesnt count as a genuine win and to not give a rematch is cowardice.
So I give you Ross Purrity the beater of 2 Klitschkos and the man Vitali ducked a rematch with.

 

:-((
if the fight wasn't stopped for the cut, you think Ross would have won a robbery points decision or even KO Vitali?! :think

 

Vitali Klitschko TKO 11 Ross Purity. Looks like he lost to me.

 

That's not a "proper" loss though apparently

 

Alexei Lezin beat both in the amateurs but also lost to both..

 

Lol, but unlike Vitaly, Puritty wasn´t ahead on the scorecards, was as onesided a beating as the one was Wlad gave to him untill he got deadly tired. Puritty really is tough as nails though, hope he is doing good these days, he deserves it for the strong will and chin he showed in his fights.

 

We all know Purrity won the event against Vitali. It's undeniable. A pyhrric for VK if ever there was one.

 

So what you're saying is the legitimacy of a cut stoppage comes down to how a boxer is doing on the scorecards?:think

 

Quite sure he means, Purrity would have never won it anyway.
It's like Khan KO5 Judah or Anthony Dirrell KO2 Kevin Engel, both the stoppages were incorrect (the first by the refs rules, the 2nd by any rules), both were heading towards a clear victory anyway.

 

to a point id agree with that.if your dominating someone and win via a cut then no1s gona care are they??if your winning but then lose on a cut when your willing to continue people are going to have something to say..and there should be a rematch..very easy to clear up..so there ya have it..thread starter is a ****ing baaboon by the way

 

That seems to be the way of the Klit

I've noticed that no Klit fans are complaining that Purrity's cut wasnt bad enough for a stoppage - but seem to think Vitali was stopped prematurely against Lewis.

This content is protected

Look what Purrity did to Vlad in the 11th - he could well have done the same to Vitali in the 12th Because Purrity was certainly not gonna be stopped

 

you dont think you sound like a hater??look what purrity did to wlad in the 11th lol...i could have done that to wlad in the 11th hell my little bro could have done it and he couldnt box eggs..the man was spent..vitali on the other hand wasnt and prob used the experiance that his brother got by not going as gung ho as him in order to not gass out..epic fail by youself my good fellow...who nex

 

So Vitali didn't lose to Lennox, is that what you're saying TS? :hey

 

Then Lewis was defeated by Vitali? Or what do you mean? :huh

 

I am just using the Klitsch fan template of him winning a fight [Vs Lewis] and overlaying onto the Purrity Vitali fight to see if Vitali fans will agree with their original reasoning or use double standards.

I am still curious why no Klitschko fans have an issue with the Purrity fight been stopped prematurely with such a small cut - but believe Vitali should have continuued against lewis