Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by catchwtboxing, Aug 22, 2020.
Close but Vitali. If it were a fight the cards would read 116-112
One of Vitali biggest strengths was his size and the fact he was matched up with plodders with no athletic ability.
Povetkin has a showed a much higher skill level than Vitali , both in technique of punching and ring IQ. His shot selection is better , his range of punches is more varied and he is miles better in close.
Against who though? He lost to the far inferior brother with an all-time glass chin.
Povetkin. Vitalis resume is just too thin.
Vitali was hurt against Sanders.
Both at their best i think Vitali picks him apart cautiously then lays it on him later in the fight. I cant see Vitali taking him lightly, he'd be focused and i think the range difference and height show massively with Vitali sitting back and possibly putting on a masterclass. Hes not getting sloppy and his chin even if he does is taking Pov's left hook. The more i think about it, i think Vitali beats the life out of him after 8
Thats a serious ko sniper that hurt him though, and a southpaw with range and height to land, Povs best shots are hooks, far less likely to land imo
Vitali barely loses a round in this match up
Vitali but not by a huge amount.
Need to factor in some things.
Both Vitalis losses were by injury.
Povetkin shouldhave loses to Huck and Hunter as well.
But also Vitali had a size advantage over most his opponents and Povetkin is at a size disadvantage in most of his fights.
Vitalis resume is pretty poor, he was a better fighter than his rcord shows but what a poor era he fought in.
Povetkin has the better resume but head to head Vitali would have beaten him.
Vitali at this point.
Now if Povetkin pulls off a couple more victories against top level comp it would tighten
I had him beating Huck. Didn't watch Hunter. Perhaps the post should read: "many people felt that he lost to Huck and Hunter."
As for the losses being to injuries, injuries of one extent or another happen in almost every match. They are not really an excuse.
The manner of wins matter to me.
So while Povetkin might have an edge on paper, that Vitali dominated his opposition, and Povetkin often labored or was in close affairs with similar level competition, is the difference maker to me.
Vitalis overall dominance, him being heavily favored to beat Povetkin head to head, and him rating higher head to head in general against the other historic heavyweights, has him rating higher all time, to me.
But its closer than I would have thought.
Those "top guys" povetkin beat all were exposed as average contenders evetnually though. Being at the top of a trash heap doesn't mean you beat top talent
How is it possible that Vitaly's division was the worst ever if a bunch of 40 year olds from that division are still at the top and knocking out top fighters?
Povetkin, Helenius, Pulev are still competitive. Ortiz is 50 years old and ranked very high.