Comparing Amateur (Kulej's Olympic Golds) To Professional (Golota's World Title Bids)

In the second half of the 20th century (esp. the 1960s and 1970s) amateur boxing teams of former communist countries such as the USSR (present-day Russia) and Poland had great Olympic teams which took home Gold Medals from the Games.

Many fans back home believe that if their Olympic stars were allowed to enter the professional ranks, then they would have surely added professional world titles to their collection of Olympic Golds. However, up until the early 90s for most of these Soviet-controlled Eastern bloc nations, professional boxing was prohibited making it impossible for guys like Jerzy Kulej of Poland to break free from the Iron Curtain. Kulej won two Gold Medals at Light Welterweight. How do those feats compare to the wondrous heavyweight glory achieved by his countryman Andrew Golota three decades later? Taking into consideration that Kulej could not compete professionally yet won Gold Medals at the most prestigious sporting event on earth, how does he compare to Golota who competed in four heavyweight world title bouts in the pro ranks but didn't win? Are Kulej's feats (despite amateur) better than Golota's accomplishments in the pros? Remember, fighting for the heavyweight crown brings a certain degree of honor and prestige. Or perhaps we cannot compare amateur boxing success to success in the paid ranks? Perhaps it's also hard to compare boxers from two completely different time periods such as a 60s Kulej and a 90s Golota?

Some people rave that amateur boxing and professional boxing are like two different sports and that one cannot compare the two. But is that really true?

Let's establish that amateur and professional are two different levels of the same sport. But to state that they're two different sports – despite the differences of headgear, judging, amount of rounds, etc. – is that a bit of a stretch?

Please let me know what you think on the case of Kulej and Golota posited above.