Just when I think you've bottomed out your hole gets deeper. Cooney a better boxer than Vitali? Not a chance. Cooney had an underdeveloped right ( Vitali's was much better than his ), wasn't as good as a jabber, could not counter as well could not move his feet as well, and was easier to hit, period! You could argue Cooney had a better hook and be correct, but that is about it. Cooney was also very carefully managed, not fighting one top fighter near his prime outside of Holmes and Spinks, whom he lost to. Yet he was competitive with a prime Holmes. Sure Cooney's power and size gave Holmes issues and Vitali is even bigger than Cooney, more skilled, 10X as confident, 5x as durable, and at least 3x as smart in the ring. Why am I even typing this? Never try to reason a man out of a position he did not reach through reason!
If Holmes doesn't show up at his absolute best and most mobile, he loses this on points and takes a beating. Holmes at his best, survives some scares to frustrate and out point Vitali, possibly cuts him but I doubt it.
Very few in hwt boxing history avoids the jab of prime Holmes. Vitali is not one of them. Prime Holmes chops up Vitali's face for a stoppage in 13 rounds. Competitive early but then all Holmes after round 5.
you can say what you want about holmes opposition, it was world class AND elite. that cant be said for V K, unless he was gettnig the shyt beaten out of him.
Norton would not last 5 rounds with Vitali. He nearly defeated Holmes at a time when Holmes was at his best and Norton, likely past his best
I would say Holmes best wins are Witherspoon, Norton, Cooney, Smith, and Mercer. These are better wins than Vitali has, but not by a huge margin. However Holmes barely defeated his best two wins in Witherspoon and Norton, would have taken Cooney the distance if the fight was 12 rounds, winning close on the cards. He caught James Smith early in his career at 14-1. The Mercer win was very impressive but a lot of that had to do with Mercer's shape and effort. Holmes lost to Spinks and got blown away by Tyson. I would say Vitali crushes Spinks 2x, and his loss to Lewis is much better than Holmes blowout loss to Tyson. Vitali's best wins are Sanders, Peter, Hide, Solis, and K. Johnson. Unlike Holmes, there were dominating types of performances across the board. I would also say the Lennox Lewis Vitali fought is better than anyone Holmes beat and take note Lewis who was never outboxed, and is in some ways better than Holmes as a boxer was down 4-2 on all scorecards. If you objectively look at it, Vitali was the master of scorecards, ahead of Chris Byrd with a torn shoulder ( reported round 3 in the corner ) and Lennox Lewis. Byrd and Lewis were two excellent boxers. Holmes lost rounds a lot of them to lesser men that Vitali would not in Williams and Spinks. I think Holmes is the better boxer. A master boxer with speed, better than Ali. However other things such as size, activity, and power go a long way in determining the winner in heavyweight boxing and Vitali who was a very good boxer in his own right has the edge here.
I think Shavers (hardest puncher ever), Berbick (former Champ) and Weaver (who on that night was something) deserve a mention too. And since you take into account Vitali's losses, it is only fair to refer to the 2nd Spinks which most thought Holmes deserved to win. And unlike Vitali, Holmes was not beaten in his prime. I take your point that Vitali was dominant in his wins and was very competitive in his defeats. However, as for resume I do not think it is a close call that Holmes has the better wins. As for the Lewis fight, I think Vitali's performance is getting overrated/overhyped over time. If you put this into perspective, it was actually the only time Vitali fought an elite opponent and he lost without controversy. He fought an old and relatively out of shape ATG and could not beat him.Under these circumstances, it seems strange to suggest that he would beat prime Holmes.
