Is Vitali the only champion who has never lost more than 2 rounds in any fight?

Vitali was a defensive wizard and nobody was able to fully solve the Vitalinci code

 

He also has historically the worst resume out of any major champion ever.

Putting aside mythical match-ups, most of the guys he fought had a brief ranking and never beat anyone relevant in the division. I say most because there are a few exceptions. Sanders, Peter, and Adamek are decent wins. Decent. But it pretty much ends there. Wladimirs resume is a million times better in contrast.

You can also make a strong case that he dropped 3, maybe 4 rounds to Byrd. Lewis fight might have been on the level, depends on how you score.

But official scorecards always seem to favor him immensely, yes.

 

Too bad Lennox turned his face into a jigsaw puzzle :hi:

 

By dirty boxing that he should have been DQ'd for.

 

Remember Cableaddict???? He tried arguing that Charr was very much in the fight, and that it was stopped to save Vitali...He was also one one of many who tried arguing that Solis was getting the better of him, and went out of their way to mention it whenever he/they could.

 

Ward.

 

How does Vitali do against:

Haye
Thompson
Fury
Jennings

 

He lost more than 2 rounds vs Byrd I've scored that fight a few times and it could have even been a draw on the scorecards at the time of the stoppage, it's arguable that he lost more than 2 vs both Chisora and Lewis.

 

Does that round where Jones shattered his gigantic Sheffield snozz count as a 10-8?

 

Vitalis opposition prior to the abscence was godawful.
So its not surprising he had all these amazing statistics.

 

No but officially he suffered a TKO so it seems to me one could argue he lost all the rounds between 7-12 because he wasn't able to fight in those rounds. I think the whole idea of how many rounds a fighter lost is meaningless. Fighter A could get KO'd in the first round in 10 fights which means he lost only 10 rounds, verses Fighter B who won all 10 fights 7-3. Fighter B, the winner, would still have lost 3*10 = 30 rounds. Therefore fighter A would have lost less rounds than fighter B, even though fighter A's record would be 0-10 and a fighter B's would be 10-0.

So as you can see it's a completely meaningless concept and historian's will have no problem understanding this.

 

YES, and it simply amazing. I'm a scratch historian and will give anyone the entire history of boxing in all weight classes.

You won't find a man who never lost more than 3 rounds. This includes Ali, Mayweather, Holmes, Calzaghe, Sugar Ray Robinson, you name it!

 

Counterpoint, I can quickly show you that Ali, Holmes or any other heavyweight lost more rounds to lesser men.

Vitali had 47 pro fights, and 235 total rounds. I'll venture an educated guess that he only lost 11 of 235 rounds.

If you want the most lopsided scorecards ever, Vitali is also king when you add in how many knockdowns he scored while he himself was never floored.

 

How can you not finish a fight and still not lose rounds? That makes no sense to me. If you were scheduled for a 12 round fight and you were KO'd in the 1st round, does that mean you only lost one round? What about the other 11 rounds you weren't able to fight, but your opponent was, do they simply disappear?

This whole concept is warped.

 

You judge the rounds scored. Vitali was utterly dominant, even in his late 30's past 40.

Anyone could lose on a cut.

Vitali was never stopped by punches, only injury. And he was always in the lead in all of his fights past round three

But the title of the thread, " Is Vitali the only champion who has never lost more than 2 rounds in any fight? " is correct. And with the backdrop of 30,000+ of men who boxed as pro, it's very impressive to be #1.