Vitali's resume may be a little weak but some of his feats are actually amazing

The point being.

It had been years since Byrd fought Vitali and in those year Byrd had firmly established himself as a consistant top 5 heavyweight and the most legitimate world champion in the division except Lewis. It is fair to say that Byrd's career had recovered from his loss to Wlad and he was at his peak between 2002 and 2005. The point of a rematch would be that Vitali in 2004 was a top ranking heavyweight with a world title while Byrd was ranked second only to Vitali and had a world title.

Beating a highly rated fighter and world champion to unify two titles is never pointless no matter what history they might have with each other.

Frankly, if 2002-2005 Byrd was not "worthy" of a fight with Vitali then nobody in the division was. He was the single most legitimate and respectable opponent there was to be found in the division once Lewis retired, and beating him clean to unify two title would have done a damn sight more for Vitali's resume and legacy then beating Danny Williams or Corries Sanders did.

Lineage means direct decent. In terms of titles going from one man to another with no breaks in the chain. If there's a break in the chain it breaks the lineage. All those fighters you mentioned were Lineal Champions and none of them are lessened by the fact that they are not one lineage, it doesn't matter that occiasonally one of them had to start a new lineage because the man before them retired with it.

 

And I'm not saying he was capable of beating Vitali. All I'm saying is that, after Lewis retired and before Vitali retired, Byrd was the single most legitimate opponent Vitali had in the entire division and beating him at that time to unify two title would not have been pointless, in fact, I would argue, Byrd in 2004 would today rank as Vitali second best win behind Peter, and unifying two title would have been one of Vitali's most significant achievements.

 

I know lineage means direct descent and technically speaking it has been broken many times, however no one refers to the breaks is the point I'm making. Everyone says it is the man who beat the man who beat the Great John L. That's all I'm saying.

As for Byrd he was an excellant Heavyweight but he was too small for either Klitschko. The public wanted nothing to do with a rematch back in 03. Danny Williams had just come off an exciting upset of the most popular fighter in the division in a great fight and then Sanders had Ko'd the best HW in the division who happened to be Vitaly's brother. Quite simply it's also a business and both fights were more attractive to the public than another snooze fest with byrd. Besides after Wlad had dominated I think it just reinforced the perception with people that his win over Vitaly was simply a fluke and the outcome of the first 8 rounds would likely be repeated if not worse in a rematch.

 

I will say based on accomplishments Byrd is one of the 2 or 3 best heavyweights on either Klitschko ledger. However looking deeper to the stylistic make up of the match he simply was not very competitive foil to them. I like Byrd and admire his skill but his 3 fights with the K bros were mismatches and quite simply his style was a turn off for many non hardcore fans.

 

Feats are to be looked at considering the men he fought. It's not Vitali's fault that most of his opponents were bums or semi-retired fighters, but let's not act like he was more than just a good boxer in an era full of bad ones.