Franklin was the number one contender for a matter of weeks. The fight was in the pipe. Then Franklin lost and wasn't the number one contender. Trying to paint this as some sort of duck is absolutely pathetic. Especially when you have fighters like Vitali Klitschko who met a top two contender how many times in his career? How many ducks does that add up to, excluding his brother? 8? 12?
So if someone is there #1 contender , wins 17 fight in a row vs. vs good competition ( For the times ), and losses once, he's out? Lot of fights are in the pipe, like say Dempsey vs Wills. If Louis wanted, he could have given Franklin a shot next, but he didn't. Vitali didn't fight #1 very often, because that was his bother. That's pretty weak example of yours. You better than that. But talking about #1 in the 1930's, we have Galento and Lou Nova as #1's, and Braddock as champion. Its' a good thing Vitali didn't have to fight them, as two of them just might knock him down as they did to Louis! Ekk! The reality is Vitali beats these #1's and champion down, with little problem and you know it, if we are being honest. Franklin by the way could hit. So could Ray and Thompson, two other African Americas that Louis didn't fight.
That's entirely up to the fighter and promoter involved, but what can be stated irrefutably is that once he is no longer the number one contender, the fighter can no longer be accused of ducking him. By definition there is a superior fighter. Louis met many number one contenders in his career. Thank you. How many number one or number two contenders did Vitali Klitschko meet in his entire career?
My point, which is founded in fact is Louis only fought two African American men, one who could not see, the other who likely beat him over 15 rounds, and was up in the second fight until showboating and getting caught. Are you telling me the African American talent was so poor, only two deserved title shots in 26 title defenses? Yeah Louis meet many white #1s in this time, you don't really think Tony Galento, Lou Nova, a 168 pound Billy Conn, Bettina ( Who Louis did not fight ) are good examples of #1 contenders, do you? Well Jimmy Bivins was #1 ranked too in 1943, where's his title shot? Oh yeah, he wasn't white. The #1 contenders Louis fought, would not be ranked in the top ten at heavyweight for the past 30 years in an annual sense. As stated Vita;i's brother was often #1 or Champion for something like 90% of the time while he was active/ Would you want to fight your own sibling for money? Not only were they brothers, they were best friends, When Vitali did face a #1, #2, or #3, they were in general better than the #1's Louis fought, and of course Vitali had no color line, and his opponents were alway over 200 pounds. We are getting off track here, once again only two African American men were choses in Louis 26 title defenses. That is my point and where I stand.
It would be easier if you quoted so people can read your replies. An extra step is required at times. My point is Franklin earned it and beat three white title opponents who were selected by Louis. It is a fair point. Only two African American men were chosen in Louis 26 title defenses. Does that sound fair? Don't you agree African American boxers who were not given title shots were better than some of their white counterparts who were?
My point is that unless those men placed themselves at number one they had no call to feel aggrieved at not receiving a shot. That is irrefutable. Franklin did so and a fight was planned. He was then immediately eliminated and the fight was pulled. He has a right to feel aggrieved but in no way can it be constituted a duck. If you are not saying it was a duck, we are in accord. If you are, I am explaining to you why you are wrong. That is absolutely disgusting that remark. Utterly pathetic. Either a) you don't know that Joe Louis didn't fight a defence in 1943 due to World War Two, which is utterly embarrassing given the length of time you have been on the forum or b) you are trying to paint Joe Louis as racist against African Americans because he didn't stage a defence in 1943 even though you KNOW Louis didn't stage a defence because of World War Two. I won't bother to ask which it is; each one is as miserably pitiful as the other. I know that, that is why I extended the question to both the number one and number two contender. In other words I am holding Joe Louis up to a higher standard because of Vitali's predicament. Can you imagine doing that for even a second? Voluntarily giving ground and holding up a fighter to a higher standard on the opposite end to the fighter you are in discussion on? For the third time, having answered every question you have asked me in detail while you persistently avoid mine: How many number one or number two Ring contenders did Vitali Klitschko meet in his entire career?
This content is protected That's great McGrain, Franklin was the #2 contender. You're helping me make my point. Thank you. The standard back in the 1930's and 1940's at heavyweight was not a high one. We both know that, #1 or #2 then would not be in the top ten now. If you want a separate thread on that one, we can go there. My hunch is you don't want to ask how Galento, Conn or Nova would do in a modern heavyweight division. Vitali beat 8-10 RIng Magazine ranked opponents, off the top of my head Peter was #1. There was some #2; and #3, which I would point out would rip Galento famous Joe Louis #1 apart. Hopefully we agree bothers should not fight, but to clarify you can answer that one? In the time that Vitali and Wlad were active champions, finding a #2 not named Klitschko was open for very short windows. Sometime the title was vacant with Wlad #1 and Vitali #2. I think Haye was #2, he didn't want to fight Vitali
Stop lying. . Peter was #2 and Sanders was #3. Vitali doesn't have 3 wins against top 5'ers. . Just two against washed up Peters and Sanders who was 10 years past his best.
I haven't extended the number two contender slot to Louis - i'm holding him up to the highest standard. But if you want, we can hold Vitali to that standard too. No, I don't want to ask that; it doesn't matter to me in the least. So the answer is "I don't know". OK, that's a fair answer. I will educate you - although possibly, also, you will educate me. You have Peter at number one in October of 2008. I have Wladimir Klitschko at number one in October of 2008. Can you explain to me why Samuel Peter was ranked above Wladimir Klitschko in October of 2008? Thanks. My list of number one or number two contenders Vitali Klitschko defeated in his career: Samuel Peter I don't think it's reasonable to hold Vitali accountable for failing to face his brother. This is specifically why I am including the number two contender so we can get some idea of how many men Vitali ducked by YOUR standard. Here is the list using year end rankings: David Haye Alexander Povetkin Ruslan Chagaev (3, but Wlad was one and Vitali was two) John Ruiz Wow. That's pretty grim stuff. Do you have any idea why Vitali wouldn't fight highly qualified non-black fighters? Ruiz, Haye, Povetkin, Chagaev...not black enough I guess to get a fight with Vitali?
The underlined is false ,a gross exaggeration, Lewis was half blind in one eye.Three months earlier he had beaten his number 1 challenger Al Gainer. How many men did Langford and Greb beat whilst having worse vision?
Did you not read my post? Many times in the rankings the Ring Magazine had a vacant championship. During these times when both Wlad or Vitlai were active one Klitschko was #1, the other guy #2. So how could they fight a #2? Please answer this. The only way is fighting each other. Other times either Wlad or Vitali was champion. This happened often with Povetkin or Haye often sitting on the #2 spot when Vitali was active. As mentioned Haye didn't want to fight Vitali. He probably felt Wlad was better for him. When Vitali came back, there was no ring magazine champion, Wlad was #1, Peter #2. Vitali beat Peter at #2. Yes I do have a reason why Vitali didn't some fight some fighters, they declined! Valuev and Haye for example backed out of offers. Another factor is promoters sometimes had a belt and were not interesting in matching their guy vs a Klitschko. Off the top of my head, Vitlai beat two #3 contenders in Sanders or Adamek. But what does a ranking really matter in hindsight after many years go by?. Galento would be consider a big joke of a #1 contender these days. Don't you agree? Sanders would Ax Galento quick and Adamek would badly out class him. Agreed? Now for s quick compare and contrast. Pulling the list from the 1939 Annual ring rankings. J[url]oe Louis[/url], Champion [url]Tony Galento[/url] [url]Bob Pastor[/url] [url]Lou Nova[/url] [url]Tommy Farr[/url] [url]Max Schmeling[/url] [url]Johnny Paychek[/url] [url]Red Burman[/url] [url]Gunnar Barlund[/url] [url]Roscoe Toles[/url] [url]Lee Savold[/url] Now that's a really bad top ten. Galento #1, Pastor #2. Suddenly your reposting of the below names doesn't look so bad. David Haye Alexander Povetkin Ruslan Chagaev John Ruiz
They can't. Howver, this was only the case on one occasion. On that occasion, Vitali's number one contender excepting himself or his brother was Chagaev - in other words i've even allowed you to count number three contenders were Vitali was 1, Wlad was two (or vice versa) but only encountered one case of this happening. Did you not read my post? This is pretty clear, I label Chagaev accordingly and explain why. I will make it even easier for you: On how many occasions did Vitali fight the highest ranked contender available to him that was neither himself nor his brother? Here is my list: Number one contenders defeated: 0 Other: Samuel Peter. Yes, but they were NOT the number three when Vitali and Wlad inhabited the number 1 and 2 spot. You ONLY get to count the number three when Wlad and Vitali are 1 and 2 NOT champion and one. Again: On how many occasions did Vitali fight the highest ranked contender available to him that was neither himself nor his brother? My list: 1) Samuel Peter
When you have both of them occupying #1 or #2, or Champion spots for years, finding a #2 who would agree to fight the #1 or Champion is not so easy. That's what I am saying, No other fighter had to deal with this so the premise of your argument. It's unfair. And if you think the 30's contenders where better than modern ones, let's start that thead. I do not think you want to go there. Sam Peter was only ranked behind Wlad, therefore if Wlad was listed at Ring Magazine champion at that time, Peter would be #1 If you want me to count the #3 contender Vitali beat, I answered Sanders and Adamek, both of who would beat Joe Louis #1's don't you agree? I don't see you answering this part of the question. Vitlai did not get a re-match vs Lewis, who was champion Not his fault. As pointed out highly ranked guys such as Haye and Valuev back out, and so did Lewis for the re-match. How is this Vitali's fault? It isn't.
On how many occasions did Vitali fight the highest ranked contender available to him that was neither himself nor his brother? My list: 1) Samuel Peter
Who else would fight him? Names please. Try replying to post #75. Here it is: When you have both of them occupying #1 or #2, or Champion spots for years, finding a #2 who would agree to fight the #1 or Champion is not so easy. That's what I am saying, No other fighter had to deal with this so the premise of your argument. It's unfair. And if you think the 30's contenders where better than modern ones, let's start that thead. I do not think you want to go there. Sam Peter was only ranked behind Wlad, therefore if Wlad was listed at Ring Magazine champion at that time, Peter would be #1 If you want me to count the #3 contender Vitali beat, I answered Sanders and Adamek, both of who would beat Joe Louis #1's don't you agree? I don't see you answering this part of the question. Vitlai did not get a re-match vs Lewis, who was champion Not his fault. He wanted one, Lewis said he do it than backed out. As pointed out highly ranked guys such as Haye and Valuev back out, and so did Lewis for the re-match. How is this Vitali's fault? It isn't.
