Comparing Wilder and Vitali

Similar on paper, but Vitali holds an edge in terms of the quality of opposition faced (which really is quite a damning indictment on Wilder).

 

Let's look at the rankings of their title opposition.

Now Wilder's title reign is still fresh in may memory, so I know that the following fighters were ranked when he beat them.

Stiverne 1 but not 2.
Ortiz 1 and 2.
He has a draw against Fury on paper, but I don't take it very seriously.

With Vitally my memory is more opaque, but I believe the following to have been ranked when he beat them:

Sanders
Peter
Gomez
Areola
Solis
Adamek

When you add the fact that Vitally beat a some ranked guy's before he lifted the WBC, like Kirk Johnson and I would guess Herbie Hyde, then you start to see clear blue water betwixt them.

 

So you think Wilder was the better fighter and beats him head to head ?

 

I wasn't going to reply to this but......

Interacting weird ? Do you know how silly you sound ? I can't believe a grown man is telling me on a boxing forum I'm "interacting weird".

Let's look back at the conversation shall we ?

You made a topic I replied to it with factual statements about both mens careers and brought up statistics to make an interesting convo. At no point did I insult you in our little back and forth.

You just kept ignoring any points that were made and just kept blindly saying the samething without ever having a rebuttal to any of my points which pretty much made the debate/conversation a null.

You then started with insults calling me a "weirdo" and I'm the one being emotional ?

My guy when you start calling someone a weirdo for nothing, and then start acting sarcastic to get a rise out of someone that is the definition of "interacting weird" or being a "weirdo" as you keep ridiculously saying.

But seeing how you can't debate and then resort to childish sarcastic insults don't worry I won't waste my time in any future debates with you.

Back on ignore "little weirdo"

 

Hard to say. Vitali's probably harder to beat due to better chin and pointfighting skills (balanced against being more injury and quit prone) but Wilder's more dangerous due to his speed, power and KO-centric gameplan.

 

No comparison, Vitali is the better and more accomplished fighter. Wilder was a great puncher but not a good boxer

 

Wilder is one who’s top heavy. Ortiz 1 and a draw for a title defense against Fury are probably the top two fights between the two.

And Stiverne beat Arreola plus Wilder didn’t skimp on guys who were WBC ranked.

Also Kevin Johnson was ranked and Breazeale might have been, or had at least done more than lots of ranked heavyweights.

 

I treat the first Fury fight, as a loss in all but name.

I will only respect bad decisions up to a point.

The best wins that the men have between them, are the Sanders and Peter on paper.

The Sanders win secured Vitally the Ring Title, and Peter was the current #2 Ring Contender, with the Ring Title being vacant when Vitally beat him.

 

Perhaps a few word's need to be said on Vitally's two best wins.

Before I do that, I have to say that I am more accustomed to tearing his resume down, when it is compared favorably to an old timer.

I know where the pillars stand.

Sanders
Sanders is one of those fighters, where you look at his best fights, and marvel that he didn't accomplish more. However his resume is what it is. When Vitallly fought him, he had just demolished Klitschko Jr, and he was at the absolute peak of his career. After Lennox Lewis retired, Vitally was the #1 contender, Chris Byrd was #2, and Sanders was #3. Obviously there was no Ring Champion. When Vitally beat Sanders, Ring Magazine recognized him as the man of the division, but many on this forum did not. The bottom line was that the number1, had only beaten his number2. Claims of lineage have stood on a worse basis, see Marvin Hart, but the bottom line is that the majority didn't buy it.

Peter
I am sure that we all know by now what Peter was, but it is important to understand what he was when Vitally fought him. He was the WBC Champion, and Ring magazine had Wald ranked at #1, and Peter ranked at #2, with no Ring Champion. Ring magazine published an article around that time, about fights that needed to be made the most. One of them was Wlad Peter. In the run up to the fight between Vitally and Peter, many people picked Peter to win, and I have to admit that I was one of them. Some bet on Vitally's skills, but others bet on a hundred years of boxing history, that said that Vitally had been out of the ring for tto long.

 

I don’t think it matters what either of us respect. It was a draw and that’s what history says.

No champion ever lost his belt in the ten point must era after dropping the challenger in separate rounds. Fury landed over ten punches in a round once in the fight, and it was 11 punches.

 

Fair enough let's just leave it was misunderstanding and with it being new years soon no need to hold grudges happy new year.

 

Vitali was miles better.

Corrie Sanders, Shannon Briggs, Sam Peter, Herbie Hide, Juan Carlos Gomez and Tomaz Adamek may not have been ATG heavies, but they were boxing champions, and absoultley bury OrtizX2 and Stiverne as a resume.

I know that boxrec is hardly authoritative, but it does try to judge greatness with the mathematics, and I think it is telling that at the time of this writing, they have Vitali at #9 all time, and Wilder at #80. I think Vitali is much too high, but i think they are ALSO being generous to Wilder.

As for a head-to-head, forgetaboutit!