Prime Vitali vs Joshua

I've already given you all the HW champs in history having it. argue with them.

WHy are they all wrong in your opinion? -5th ask. explain now.

 

Both Vitali and Wladimir never retired after hitting 38 years of age, neither did Hoylfield or Ruiz as they defended their titles with honour and gave rematches to those who they had close fights with.

 

you've already mentioned exceptions, but you havent answered why 99% were wrong.
lets not get into
1.wlads lack of rematching losses even whenhe wasnt about to retire though nor
2. Ruiz and Holyfield NOT defending a world title at all that age
- since your grounds are weak enough already without weakening it with your lying.

Just focus on the 99%. answer why they are wrong.

 

Now you are talking exceptions. You should not attempt maths if you believe 99% of heavyweights defending titles retired before the age of 38.

Most of the heavyweights of Lewis era defended their well into their late forties. You are not going to concede that Lewis was in fact the exception for he had a contractual clause which he failed to honour through cowardice. No one today really respects him beside nationalistic desperadoes from Britain who want to claim him as their own along with the canadians.

 

the maths is about right in that the maths is ON MY SIDE not yours, I am not going to pull out a calculator for you - the onus is on you to prove them all wrong.

Are you going to try or not? Were they all wrong to retire or not? 6th time ask.

 

You are a nutcase, I've just shown you proof that they did not all retire and yet you still affirm that 99% of them did.

You've ruined this thread through your stubborn refusal to concede that that Lewis simply retired due to not wanting anything more to do with Vitali.

 

Just to do the math fro you, I count 64 world champs who DIDNT.

you mentioned three who did defend - Foreman, and the K bros. Even one of your three, wlad k, only managed ONE successful defence at 38 onwards, against the appalling former janitor Jennings and it was obvious wlad should have retired by then. You lied about Holyfield and Ruiz I'm afraid. Even ol Jersey Joe didnt manage to defend at 38.

You have a hand of 3, and one of them is pyssweak. Theres 96% against you.

SO now, marginally amended question - explain why that 97% were wrong. GOOD LUCK.

 

getting a huff because u cant reply? ok.

 

Vitali would absolutely grind Joshua down lol

 

As said previously I would pick Vitali and when I write this I am aware that Vitali wasnt prime in some of these fights but I would guess Joshua may look more impressive against common opposition in Vitalis fights with Chisora, Adamek, Briggs, K Johnson when Vitali fought him.
I think Vitalis awkward boxing would cause Joshua problems, which is why I would favour Vitali later on

 

Closest guy to Joshua Vitali ever faced was Lewis.

It was Lewis that ground Vitali down.. 'lol'

 

Exactly. After all he was "like fine wine" that "only got better with age".

One taste of Vitali turned that wine to vinegar and all of a sudden "Mah mum says ah cain't" and "Mah wife says no".

 

Lewis > Joshua just a little bit I think.

 

I admit that I didnt read all of your post but Joshua wasnt overly busy or effective when backed up against Wlad. Vitali had a decent workrate which I feel would effect Joshuas output and dont think there would be so many of the Joshua jabs you mention.
Although Wlad moved alot more in the Joshua fight I feel Vitali was less stationary overall than Wlad

 

Yes. I agree. At this time I would favour prime Vitali but we dont know if Joshua is prime yet and he may get even better.