Mike Tyson v Vitali Klitschko

Hard to have a guy in your Top 10, even H2H, who lost to his 2 best opponents and his best wins are Corrie Sanders and Sam Peter.

His brother was better at every aspect of boxing. The only things Vitali had over him were chin and balls. Not to mention Wlad actually beat better guys and many more of them.

 

Your first point is very fair!
But see the 2nd post by Pop Pellegrino on the preceding page on this thread-he makes an excellent case about the quality of his victories.
When one of those losses is to a H2H monster he was ahead of by a couple rounds early before the injury that should be considered, but mainly how seldom he lost rounds in 40 some fights..

But I disagree with you about the comparison to his Brother.
Chin & cojones means a lot, but he also had better endurance & work rate.
Just how many punches you throw & land means a lot!
Better punch variety too, better natural fighting instincts & at landing from awkward angles.
So many say Wlad was better & it is clearly true, but pick Vitali H2H.

He also did not clinch a lot, but you might say if they let Wlad get away with it so much you will not penalize him for it.

But he does not need to be as good as Wlad to make top 10: because Wlad like Louis is near the tippy-top in H2H.

Mostly because of how long he was dominant.
A H2H that measures a whole career would have Vitali lower than what is usually meant by it, round robin or at a very few peak years of each guy.

Where would you have Vitali H2H?

 

Vitali is maybe in my top 5 H2H but doesnt make my overall top ten...most days. Ali, Holmes, Usyk, Vitali and Wlad normally fill my top 5 H2H...

Oh I'm gonna get slaughtered for this, aren't I?

 

Putting Vitali ahead of Lewis is a difficult argument

 

I like the cut of your jib!

Just do not know if Holmes makes it, John Thomas wrote an excellent post recently about all those he avoided & did not give rematches to.
And Usyk...do not know if he did enough at HW. But I understand the logic, those who he beat & then who those guys did or could beat, you trianguate.

I agree it is hard not to have Lewis up there.

And as the creator & continual commentator on this thread I absolutely agree on how high Vitali might rate-H2H.

Size & strength galore, granite chin, significant & subtle boxing skills, high volume means a lot & can pick up the pace late...

 

It was simple for me, I think Wlad stops Lewis. Lewis maybe number 6 on my H2H list...sometimes Liston.

 

Oh God, here we go. You shouldn't have brought up Liston. Now we're about to get the inevitable wild tangent from this guy about how Liston was unproven, chinny, overrated, etc.

 

Tucker may not be as good as vitali overall, but he was objectively faster, more mobile, and had a jab that was at least as long and good as Vitali’s, yet he heavily struggled to land on Tyson. Now how would Vitali, who has a history of missing a lot whenever he fought someone who was defensively sound, do that much better than tony?

 

Saying Vitali’s resume is not Ali-esque is understating it a bit. Peters is the best of these guys, and I certainly doubt he would even rank in Tyson’s top 10 wins were they to have fought.

 

I give Vitali credit for his domination of B class Heavyweights.

And that's not me being sarcastic BTW because alot of Heavyweights are inconsistent and lose to fighters they shouldn't.

So Vitali's consistency and not losing many rounds in his career does deserve credit.

But my issue with Vitali is that he had 2 golden opportunities in his 2 biggest fights and he didn't pass the test.

Byrd had a weeks notice and he was basically fighting in Vitali's backyard the Klitschko's were massive in Germany.

And yet he didn't find a way to really assert himself against a much smaller fighter like his brother Wladimir.

Yes I know Vitali had the shoulder injury but the fight was still competitive despite the myth that Vitali dominated Byrd which is false.

And then you have the Lewis fight who was in his late 30s and who was at a career high weight not in good shape.

But yet despite this looking like a passing of the torch moment Vitali failed.

Yes again I know the cut was a bit unfortunate but again it was from a legal punch and Vitali was facing a Lewis not at 100 percent and he couldn't get the W.

Rahman took his chance against an underprepared Lewis but Vitali couldn't do the same.

So whilst with Vitali's size, durablity, stamina, he would be a major threat H2H.

It's still guess work in regards to how Vitali would do against elite Heavyweights.

And a prime Tyson is like 2 levels above anyone Vitali beat let's be real.

 

To me is all about who you beat. Vitali was consistent beating second and third tier heavyweights. He fought in an era considered weak, but his brother was fighting in that era to, yet he did beat all the top contenders, except Vitali of course. Based on the real H2H results, I would put Vitali in the Top 20. I don't deal with wouldas and fantasy fights in my head, cause it's just that, a fantasy. I'm interested in the real world results and accomplishments.

 

I think Tyson has a real chance of stopping him early , particularly rounds 1-5.
If Tyson gets under Klitschko's punches and starts landing those left hook s to the body and head then things could get very uncomfortable for the big guy.
But if Klitschko survives the early onslaught then the fight could start to swing his way.
He's simply enormous compared to Tyson and his durability could lead to him losing his composure .
My pick is, either Tyson early or Klitschko survives and stops him late.

 

The difference I have is that the way he beat his opponents & the skills he had can be compared to others who fought similar opposition-like Lewis vs. McCall & Rahman.
So even if they did not beat top HWs, I think it reasonable to consider how well they were likely to do against the very best.
Assuming they had an excellent record & many fights.
Many folks here & on other forums find this sensible & rate Vitali as high as top 5 due to triangulating his dominance & considering how well he would do against the most elite fighters.

I can respect if you & Dynamic Puncher cannot put him as high as top 10 because you need more direct evidence.
A case can be made either way.

Regarding Byrd, yes it was competitive even though he was ahead.
Given the tremendous success Vitali had in winning rounds I would not penalize him for not dominating Byrd-there are lost of smaller HWs that even prime or still great Ali did not dominate-& may have been behind until near the end. Like Ringo or Jones, later Lyle & Shavers...

Against Lewis when he was overweight (but a quite small % more than recent fights where he did great in the mid-late 240s), methinks being 2 rounds ahead in a short fight is about as well as anyone would have done-just the facial injury was unfortunate.

Take Lewis in terms of when he was unimpressive, let alone his shocking losses.
Like he should have done much better-at least in the 2nd fight-against a Holyfield who could then only fight aggressively in spurts.
And while some say Mercer should have gotten the decision, the reason Lewis won seems Merecer tired-same Mercer who Holmes took to school.

Anywho, it seems rational to either rate him very high in H2H like many do-as long as you have him lower in career accomplishments & greatness-or refuse to have him at that level based upon who he fought.

 

In my view, Vitali is one of the most overrated heavyweights of all time. Strictly because his rating in the eyes of many is based on wouldas and fantasy fights. I can argue that Ike was a H2H monster that way too. But there is no enough evidence for that.

Also, usually, there are reasons why a fighter is not facing top competition. Vitali was kinda similar to Fury in that way. He lost to Byrd, first Top 10 guy he ever faced, then fought obscure opposition before challenging Lewis and losing, then beat Sanders and then again defended his title against a third tier guy in Williams. He didn't face his mandatory Rahman and dropped the belt due to his injuries, but even when that was going on, he tried to petition WBC to have another voluntary defense and swerve Rahman. By that time he only beat 1 Top 10 guy in Sanders.

After he came back he didn't challenge himself either. Sure, he was old and injury prone, but again, there was a reason why he was doing it. The same reasons why he wasn't willing to face top competition on the regular basis, may be reasons why he might have not been that good at a very top level. Hell, some people give him more credit for losing to an out-of-shape Lewis, than they give Rahman for beating younger out-of-shape Lewis. And you can argue Rahman was drawing the fight with Lewis on points before knocking him out (as per Harold Lederman's scorecard). That's called grasping for straws if the real results aren't there.

I do not penalize Vitali for losing to Byrd - it's boxing, everyone can lose, especially fighting hurt. I do however penalize him for not rematching him and the fact that he lost to 2 best guys he faced. This says a lot about his resume and ability, or should I say, willingnes to test that ability against top contenders.

I find Lewis to be overrated H2H also, but at least Lewis fought a lot of top guys of his era and as a champ he defended against a top contender twice after becoming undisputed. Vitali never beat the best heavyweight in the world, nor number 2 when he was number 1 for a short stretch. These things matter.

Vitali is a "what if" story to me. Helluva what if story at that.

 

I was not aware that Vitali was unwilling to face elite competition, or dodged Rahman.
If so, I may have to revise my H2H assessment of him.