Were the Klitschko's that good?

Not really he just made it look crap

 

Over the years there's been a Wlad Vs every ATG thread and you see the same posters picking Wlad every time.

They think he's the undefeatable, greatest HW that ever lived..

 

Yeah they pick him to win the same way you pick him to lose. No different really since there is no way we can prove it either way.

 

They were good athletes with good business acumen, involved with other smart businessmen, who saw an opportunity and seized the moment (and they were good enough, at least, to capitalize on an impending gap in a global market).

Neither of them needed to be particularly exceptional boxers to encroach upon the void. But they both had some talent and their physical stature and the fact they were brothers helped them stand out in a crowd.

Regardless of them being able to attract notoriety, they did need to beat everyone else they fought to develop the brand.

They already had a solid fan-base in Europe that would tune in, regardless of how poor their opponents or how painfully boring their fights were. To go global (or to lay the ground for an expanded, worldwide audience), they needed a mythos and Vitali provided just that by having the stuffing punched out of him by Lewis.

His ability to take punches, get sliced up and keep coming, created a legend. That the scorecards at the time of the stoppage showed Vitali ahead just galvanized positive attitudes towards him and his 'Herculean' effort. His most notable performance - a loss - made him a star.

Perception is reality. Just ask the K fans who still think Vitali is better than Lewis because he was ahead on the cards after six rounds.

This state of affairs served not only Vitali. It was also the foundation on which Wlad was able to survive what should have been career-defining losses. They were even able to spin Wlad's loss to Sanders as a revenge plot, a year later (having already done something similar with Vitali's loss to Byrd).

It is notable that, between them, they collectively lost to and avenged defeats against Byrd, Sanders and Brewster, with only the last of these being a like-for-like rematch (and which, in itself, was a disgrace).

I am not entirely sure why Vitali decided to retire in 2005 - save for the claim of injuries, which didn't stop him from coming back a few years later (and a few years older). It always seemed an odd choice to me from a sporting perspective. However, when looking at it through a commercial lens, it made good business sense to clear a path for Wlad's rebuild and eventual dominance of the division (by then bereft of notable talent). Having Vitali return to take on soft touches and rake in big purses was part of the business plan, I suspect.

Having honed his 'jab-and-grab-and-push-and-pull-and throw' skills while Vitali was in recess, Wlad's wrestling eventually made up the lion's share of his arsenal. It became too easy for him to resort to using this type of fouling whenever he was pressured. Absolute nullification of his opponents' ability to box was of paramount importance. This was a utilitarian approach to managing the risk of him being KO'd.

Rather than apply his talent and use actual defensive skills or fight opponents off of him, it was hug, push and 'break', or hug and throw to the ground. Ironically, Vitali did not resort to this kind of fouling. His defense could be breached but he was capable of dealing with it with boxing.

Wlad's cultivated long jab was not a foolproof solution to his being vulnerable to pressure. The straight right-hand, while very effective, was not always going to be the eraser needed to bail him out. Indeed, the grabbing and leaning down on his opponents' shoulders, even allowing his feet to leave the canvas, on occasion, to maximize the load placed on his opponent's body was not only a defensive imperative, it was critical aspect of Wlad's offense.

Of course, he didn't always need to resort to this tactic. Against much lesser opposition; smaller and over-matched, or simply talentless opponents who didn't even attempt to pressure Wlad, would be easy to keep at bay and dispose at range. I imagine that it is advantageous to be able to get away with fouling round-after-round against a genuine threat while looking good against completely mismatched challengers who had no chance to begin with.

This is 'good' for some people; exceptionally good for others. It might have been - relative to the era. Even then, I personally don't think either of them were that good, historically. However, had Vitali been able to take the lead here, we might have had a more interesting heavyweight division from 2005 to whenever and have seen better fights. How much more and how much better would be difficult to say, but it couldn't have been worse than the years of drudgery that ensued under the reign of Wlad. Shallow division or no, that guy really knew how to make a meal out of fodder.

 

Lot of yapping just to say i don't like them

 

I am sure he kept getting injured and pulling out multiple fights.

I think maybe a break was the only option in that case and even on HBO in a Wlad defense HBO mentioned Vitali wanted to come back but his injuries were still bothering him.

 

Picking him to lose against guys way above the level of the guys he beat and lost to is more realistic than picking him to win.

 

I think their consistency is the unfortunate proof of quality more than their opponent's best level. They're clearly as good as anyone in the nineties who isn't an obvious great, and probably as good at their best than any of those guys at worst. And worst than the best of the worst that they are good or great for but goodest for their VERY goodness or near-greatness but not necessarily super great or mid-level great, and very minor great to mid-level somewhere, but not p4p so.

I find it bizarre that literally everyone this forum rates, either rates them the way I do or they are very over or underrated.

 

Yep. And while Tyson shared era with ATGs like Holy and Lewis, he didn't beat them. He arguably didn't beat any of the top 3 besides himself during his era. So I don't see why Wlad's time of dominance often is frowned upon as it is.

 

They were good but they were in a weak era so it’s a bit of both.
Vitali was better than Wlad.
They’re both in that area between the Ali’s, Louis’, Fraziers and the Mercer’s, Shavers and Morrisons

 

Weak division. Someone with no knowledge of boxing whatsoever could have accurated predicted Wlad's opponents on looks alone.

Bet the appropriately aged, sized, and in shape HW beats the short, fat, and/or old, guy.

TF was Mormeck even doing?

 

I think it's the Klitscko Kliq that goes around tearing down Foreman at every turn. Like, real flippant about it.