Is Vitali klitschko a top 10 ATG?

No. But he'd beat most of the dudes in the top ten. Boxing's a ****ed up sport.

 

Yah? Lets break it down then. Answer me these questions about wlad and Vitali.

Who has more fights?
Who has fought better competition and WON?
Who has had a better and longer title reign?
Who has fought more championship fights?


I rest my case. You NEVER rank guys based on H2H.

 

Actually, some guys ranks HEAVILY on H2H perception. I believe Billy is one of them. You could say Miguel Cotto has had longer "reigns" and more "title fights" than Kid Gavilan. It doesn't mean he ranks higher.

 

No he has never beaten the man, his resume is just to **** poor, Wlad is easily the better of the 2.

 

Vitali is easily top 10 ATG. Him taking 4 years off and making a heavyweight champ quit on his stool his first fight back illustrates the point.

At 40 he is still kicking ass, something Ali could not do nor the rest with the exception of Foreman who is top 5 ATG.

 

Yes.
Not to mention that I can't think of but maybe a couple heavies in history who are still as dominant at almost 40 as Vitali is.

And his comeback thrashing of Peter, after being out for so long IS unprecendented in heavyweight history. NOone had ever done that before.

Certainly VK is an all time great. But where on the list he ranks is a matter of opinion. Too subjective to be concrete about it. But he certainly belongs on the list somewhere.

 

Yeah, Ali may've had numerous victories over future HOFers but that pathetic 35+ career where he was embarrassingly "suffering" from Parkinsons? He'd be lucky to make top 100...(35+ titlists).

 

Well, some guys dont know **** about boxing.

How exactly do you rank MYTHICAL match ups to make a place for the most elite fighters in history? Really? thats the criteria you use? Fantasy?

Rather than objective criteria. You just been schooled sonny.

 

**** no he has lost to the greatest fighters he has fought, period. his reign is unimpressive to boot as well

ranking h2h is legitimate, whats the difference with that and any perceptions of ability? obviously it takes 2nd to resume and title accomplishments but it is absolutely relevant

 

Why are you mad and defensive?

My point was not that Ali, Louis, Marciano ect were not great because they did not fight as older men. My point was that a fighter still being great at 40 does matter when you consider how great thew were/are.

George Foreman's comeback is proof of that, just ask any expert son.

 

Who's mad at what now? Sarcasm is not anger or defensiveness.

I got schooled by pointing out how some people rank fighters and not myself? How's that?

 

hahaahaha boxed eers u kno nothung about boxing u ***et! mythical creature matchups LOL!

 

these sort of achievements should be given consideration in ATG judgement, but unfortunately all too many are too concerned with resume alone

 

Only if you weight head to head ability way more than resume. The fact is he doesn't have the names on his record to justify such a high rank otherwise. The way he has dominated at his age is worth something though. George Foreman went up a lot for his comeback in the 90s

I'd put Wlad in the top 10 for a combination of dominant performances, head to head ability and consistency