You’ve got a point. But kind of wasting your time arguing with that one...he doesn’t really care about facts. He just cares what like minded people that will echo his own thoughts think. Man Vitali is so much sloppier then I remember him. Although his punch mechanics are better then primos I take 70s opinion that primo was just as good as most contenders today or yesteryear. But less so then the upper echelon.
Right, you're saying what I'm saying. Ali in the Berbick fight looks like Vitali in his prime. No really, watch the footage. You seem to contradict yourself by saying that distance control is an intangible, but also a technical skill. That's an oxymoron. But we don't need to get caught up in the weeds here. If you want to argue that keeping your hands below your waist is not a technical deficiency, fine. I'll give you this one. Although this is one of the most common gripes "modernists" have with old school fighters who don't fight out of a high guard. Well, chin. Carnera fell over because he got hit in the face. Otherwise, he looked fairly steady on his feet relative to HW giants like Vitali. Let's recap the argument. The argument which you laid out is that fighters like Vitali exemplify an evolved version of the sweet science in comparison to Primo Carnera. Let's keep that in mind. So when you say "Yeah Vitali made mistakes, but Carnera made them too," that doesn't support your argument. To help your argument, you need to demonstrate that Vitali displays an evolved version of the sweet science in comparison to Carnera. And it's worth noting, that I don't believe Carnera stuck his chin out the way Vitali did. Primo seems to tuck his chin behind his long reach and back foot stance. More effective? Probably. Calling Carnera's punches "awkward" in comparison to Vitali's? No way in hell. Vitali pushed, pawed (whatever you want to call it) his punches very often. Just watch his fights. I don't see Vitali having more snap or finesse in his punches than Carnera. Rather, he punches better on intangible qualities such as power, timing, etc. No. And this is why I've recapped your argument over and over. So we don't lose sight of the fact that this whole back and forth between young I stems from your claim that Vitali Klitschko displays an evolved version of the sweet science from Carnera. I've worded this carefully, and specifically, so as not to distort your claim. If you don't want to stick with that argument, fine by me. I would consider "just answer the question" to be demanding. As for being intentionally intellectually dishonest, I would find that statement quite ironic, considering what you claim Vitali is as a boxer, versus what we see on film.
The farther removed in time we are from a fighters career, the better we see them for what they were. We become less entangled in their personalities, their storylines, and all the jazz.
Hardly the Sweet Science is it. The flipside tho is a guy like Larry Holmes or Ali would put as whooping on Vitali.
So do You think Ali in the Berbick fight could beat all of Vitali's best opponents? A skill is an intangible thing that a person possesses so that's not a contradiction at all. "Skill" is not a physical thing you can look at or grasp. The irony here being that plenty of boxers fought out of a high guard and then when Ali came along they called him foolish and said it would just be a matter of time before the loud mouth got laid out for his reckless hands down style. Now people are back to saying a higher guard is best. So let's take chin out of the equation. Did Vitali constantly fall over off balance? No. So at the end of the day, does it matter that he "looked" awkward? Your favorite fighter was called awkward even by his own trainer and the press at the time. A fighter does not have to be pleasing to the eyes, they just have to win or try their best. Look, I have heavily criticized his resume, but Vitali only has 2 losses and both were fights he could have won if not for freak injuries. He got **** done and was always in shape and listened to his trainer. That wasn't my argument. Let me clarify what I mean: Carnera made some of The same mistakes and looked even WORSE. As for Carnera's chin, why do posters like you and Choklab claim certain fighters did or didn't do things when I can simply watch the tapes? Even after being dropped by Baer for the 5th times Carnera still had his head in the air with little movement and irresponsible defense. That's exactly why Baer kept dropping him, it wasn't solely because of his chin. Do you think Baer would have such an easy time landing if he tucked his chin and had even 1 hand up? Is That too much to ask from a boxing champion? Either his trainers sucked or he didn't listen. There is no excuse because you had guys with great defense like Jack Johnson long before Carnera. As for demonstrating how Vitali was better than Carnera, I will break that down in another post. These tend to drag out and get very long. Vitali had way better form in his punches even if he did sometimes punch from the arms. Carnera would sometimes throw looping shots that didn't have any weight on them and that is probably why he didn't have as many knockouts. I truly believe guys like Futch and Steward revolutionized big man boxing (guys over 6'3 and more than 220+) Willard was also awkward. Terrel and Bugner were surprisingly cautious and timid. I don't think it's a coincidence that prior to the 80's you had very few big men who looked impressive in terms of mechanics/athleticism/form/etc. I don't believe I've changed anything in my argument. I think it's very silly that we're even having this conversation. Vitali retired champion emiritus and is guaranteed to be in the hall of fame if he isn't already. He could be robotic and awkward and doesn't have the greatest resume but he was a serious threat during his run and a serious threat h2h. Carnera is none of these things. He was not even taken that seriously in his own era so I don't get this revisionist need to act like he was something he is not. I said just answer the question because you act cheeky all the time, not just with me but in other threads. I didn't feel like going back and forth with you playing word games or needing to clarify what each person meant, etc. What am I being dishonest about? I do not think Vitali is some sort of boxing savant. He is not even in my top 10 most technically skilled heavyweight boxer list. I just think he's certainly higher on my overall list than Primo circus strong man Carnera. This whole thing started because you derailed the Carnera vs Wilder thread cherry picking the ugliest fight of Lewis and Vitali's careers and basically implying that represented their overall skill level ignoring their other fights.
Oh my goodness it doesn't pass the eye test because his style is awkward. He is far more skilled than carnera. On eyesight alone he looks like trash but his EE style is deceiving. Its cherrypicking because you're picking his worse looking moments. Watch the Corrie Sanders fight and you can see the skill and see the talent. He evaded multiple fast straight punches because as I've said his sloppy awkward style is deceiving. He can use his freakish physical dimensions well unlike Carnera and afford to lean back due to his skill unlike Carnera, he picks his shots far better than Carnera as well. You can also look at a past prime Klitschko comfortably outboxing prime Arreola. Because his style is deceiving. His movement, ring iq, and reflexes are levels above Carnera if you analyze both styles carefully. He was also great at parrying. Add to the fact that you're average world class heavyweight is 6'4 235-240 pounds nowadays and more cordinated than the likes of Max Baer and you can piece it together. Im tired of the Klitschko slander. He would have severely ourclassed Carnera. You guys are more informed about boxing how do you not see this
Why do you quote me when you don't touch things I said in my post? I already said that Vitali was clearly better fighter, but it doesn't mean that he's some kind of evolved version of Carnera. He's sloppy as hell, he just has better talent.
Sloppy is a strange adjective to use for someone who has such a high connect % and who rarely loses rounds.
You can use different word if you wish. He simply wasn't technically sound and his defense was all about reflex. Facing much shorter opponents on regular basics certainly helped (only Hoffman was taller than Vitali among all opponents he faced).
