Comparing Wilder and Vitali

Then you agree Vitali has a much better win resume.

I agree both have extremely poor win resumes relative to how good they actually likely were.

As mentioned, I don't know much about the HoF. Isn't Gatti in it? I'd say both Vitali and Wilder were better and more famous, globally, than Gatti. I don't consider any of the 3 of them ATG's.

I do wonder if Vitali could have been a HW ATG with the right competition, but we will never know.

 

Vitali was a highly skilled, well rounded , well conditioned , highly intelligent and disciplined fighter with a cast iron chin who fought and defeated much, much better opposition through out his career than Wilder ever did .. Wilder was the biggest one trick pony in the history of sport ... without question his power was without peer but that aside his lack of skill and quality of opposition was astonishing, also putting into question at least to me so much of the "all time great " status place on the extremely brave and charismatic but overrated Fury .... other than height and numerical record I don't see much in common ...

 

Vitali's best wins are Peter and Sanders, not great by any stretch but better than Ortiz and Stiverne who are Wilder's best wins.

 

[QUOTE="lufcrazy, post: 22666907, member: 44674"]It's a very close edge though isn't it. I feel like Wilders best win, beats Vitalis best win though.

We don't know who does better against past HWs though, it's only ever gonna be a feeling not a fact.[/QUOTE]
Peter and Sander are better than Ortiz and Stiverne.

 

Vitlai was 37 when he fought Peter, not 42.

 

Peter would probably lose to Stiverne (just as Arreola got schooled, dropped and KO'd) and the inconsistent 3 round fighter Sanders would probably lose to Ortiz, who had vast experience against southpaws in the amateurs and notable success against them.

It's splitting-hairs at the end of the day. Vitali and Wilder both feasted on much the same kind of opponent: short plodders.

The bias in this thread is predictable. A lot of talk about Vitali's chin and his rounds won ratio, not much talk about the unavenged quitjob against Byrd: the first time Vitali ever faced adversity in a pro boxing ring. Wilder's never quit and never lost on an injury (including a cut). Vitali also lacked one-punch power in relative terms, needing over 22 minutes to get rid of anyone Danny Williams level or above. 15 of his 19 post-Mahone wins were such. And he couldn't put a dent in blown-up LHW Byrd over 9 rounds or Lewis in 6, who started slowly in that fight and was susceptible to one-punch KO's. Had he been able to, maybe he wins those fights.

So there are key metrics where Wilder is clearly superior to Vitali.

 

"H2H it's not even close Wilder lost more rounds to Ortiz than Vitali did in his entire career"

1. Wilder is 2-0 against Ortiz, Vitali is 0-2 against Lewis and Byrd despite winning most of the rounds, something to ponder

2. Vitali lost at least 10 rounds by consensus on the cards in his career, more than Wilder lost against Ortiz over two fights officially (9)

 

Wilder could beat short plodders with a jab and movement too, he did a better job on Arreola in fact. Vitali didn't show much adaptability in his losses.

 

I agree on both counts (based on my admittedly very limited understanding of the HoF).

 

Apologies, I stand corrected.

 

It was a draw, chief. Fights aren’t scored off sticking your tongue out, doing a little shimmy, and looking stylish.