Larry Holmes Versus Vitali Klitschko

Ive posted the video many times when arguing with Mendoza. The posts are out there. Go and search for yourself. If anyone else wants to see the video I'll post it. You can go on ignore now.

 

You're a sensitive soul, aren't you?

 

I've seen the interview with Byrd.

In it he mentions the short-notice nature of the Vitali bout (eight-to-ten days notice) and that he hadn't seen him fight before, because there was no footage of him. Although, I think it's fair to deduce that what he is really stating is that there was no 'available' footage of Vitali for him to view.

It seems likely, as well, given the timing (2000). I doubt Vitali had been covered by a US TV Network before the Byrd fight - not saying with absolute certainty that this was the case but, up until then, his fights had been aired on various Euro channels.

Maybe if they'd had more time, they could have canvassed European sources, but I should imagine that, once they'd drawn a blank with their US TV contacts, it was considered a dead-end.

In any event, I'd take Byrd at his word here.

 

I doubt it. Byrd gave him fits

 

At the time, the issue was Vitali never fought in the US. The Byrd camp did not have access to Vitali fights in Europe on such short notice. Youtube was only created in 2005.

 

Thanks MM. If you say Byrd claimed he'd seen no footage of Vitali prior to the fight, then that is good enough for me.

It's possible Byrd was telling the truth and possible he was lying. There’s no way to know for certain, of course. All I'll say is, if his team had wanted to get their hands on footage of Vitali badly enough, they'd have been able to without too many problems. Major US TV networks would have had contacts at Sky in the UK, it would not have presented a major challenge for them to have obtained footage.

 

I remember Byrd saying that. Byrd is a guy who improvises in the ring so the tapes were not a big deal.

 

It's altogether possible that Byrd's team could have sourced and acquired some film.

However, if HBO didn't already have possession of the licensed footage then, given the sort of timeframe here, it's worth noting that the bureaucracy and logistics involved might have made it pointless to even try. Even with urgency, haste and an issue-free process, the licensing alone would have taken days to arrange - and that is just so unlikely.

Even if there had been a useful, informal, transatlantic grapevine, through which to make a side-request, there would still have been the process of assigning someone to copy the fight onto physical media and mail it overseas, at a cost (again, unlikely). Limited internet tech, back in those days, would have ruled out file-sharing and email.

I suspect the Byrd team might have had other priorities to contend with, in their week and a bit of preparation. Unless HBO already had film to hand, obtaining something in time would have been pretty much a non-starter.

 

It isn't a significant enough issue to justify us getting into a lengthy discussion MM, so for my part I'll end it by saying if Byrd's team felt not having footage of Vitali was a major disadvantage, I'm very confident they'd have obtained some without substantial issue.

Assuming no one in the US, that Byrd's team could contact, in a multi million dollar yet relatively small, insular industry, had footage of a current world titlest and ring magazine ranked #7 HW (unlikely in 2000, imo), it most certainly would not have been beyond Byrd's team and wider network to contact someone in Germany or the UK, where footage of Vitali was definitely readily available, and ask them to copy to DVD and send by express delivery, at a total cost that would have represented less than 0.01% of Byrd's purse for the fight.

I appreciate you acknowledged the above would be possible, I just have a different view to you on how much hassle and cost would have been involved, which is no biggie.

 

I really don't see any standout fights that would elevate Tim Witherspoon, even his wins over Page and Tubbs could have gone either way and he was KO'd in one round by Bone Clutcher Smith and lost to Pinklon Thomas - Chisora-Adamek-Briggs-Solis-Arreola-Gomez-Peter-Sanders- Johnson could have all competed against the Holmes opposition. Look at what Mike Tyson did to the likes of Berbick, Williams, Tubbs, Thomas, Spinks, and Holmes.

The point is Vitali had tools and consistent conditioning and good reach, good leg movement and a strong right hand. I think he had an excellent chance to upset Holmes and was better than any of Holmes defense opponents at the time Holmes fought them.

No reason to go back and forth - enjoy your opinion

 

Chris Byrd didn't have much of a "team" back then. He was small time and was being being managed by his wife. He had no major backing behind him that could make overseas networks burn fight footage onto CDs for him on a days notice.. LOL

He explained before how the Klitschkos acted as his promoter and how he had no choice in defending his belt against Wlad. . K2 would become known for demanding opponents sign contacts that tied them up in back to back fights with both brothers.

 

Norton only won 2 of his next 5 fights after Holmes, getting KO'd in 1 round 2X and getting dropped 2X in his draw vs Scott Ledoux but Norton was good vs the fighters who did not possess the tipping point power but his history against good power guys is poor.

 

Right enough, Greg

 

I'm not saying you're not allowed to have a different opinion my issue with your posts is that you're only focusing on the negatives of Holmes's resume but not Vitali's ?

Vitali had a significantly worse resume with far less wins against ranked opposition, so my point is if you're discrediting Holmes's resume then by that same logic you should be discrediting Vitali's resume aswell surely ? Otherwise you're just looking at all the negatives of Holmes and not Vitali.

Neither man has a great resume which is fair to say but Holmes has a better one with more wins against ranked opposition which is correct is it not ?

Holmes also never lost in his prime where as Vitali did. And you could also say Vitali had perfect opportunities to beat his two best opponents a late notice Chris Byrd who he had huge size advantages over, and a 38 year old Lewis who was out of shape and under prepared and Vitali still failed in both fights despite having good opportunities and being in his prime.

 

Just thought of another argument that I haven't seen before:

If Vitali’s “serious injury” were genuine and he injured himself by throwing and missing too many punches as many speculate, why wasn’t he more economical going forward? According to Compubox he threw 1013 against Kevin Johnson for instance, even though Kevin was trying to replicate Byrd’s gameplan and Vitali could have won safely without throwing nearly as many.

Furthermore, Vitali signed to fight Hoffmann within 6 months of the Byrd loss. I don't know how much inside 6 months but this September 29th 2000 article was publicising the scheduled fight:

https://rp-online.de/sport/vitali-klitschko-und-timo-hoffmann-boxen-in-hannover_aid-8235199

He also fought Hoffman just 6 weeks after Wlad-Byrd 1, so those who claim "the schedule didn't permit a Byrd-Vitali rematch" are full of crap.