How does Vitali Klitschko do against some of the greats?

I'm talking about 2003-05.
Anyway, I'm not here to bash Klitschko, just pointing out that he didn't do much at the top-flight.

Fair enough.
You agree with me that Frazier showed the heart of a lion in Manila then ?

You understand that he DID protest the stoppage as much has could possible be expected from a TRUE WARRIOR in those conditions ?

I dont think I was talking negative.
I never questioned Vitali's heart, for one thing.
I was simply talking reality.
Let's assess Vitali on what he did.

If you want to match him with greats you have look at what happened against Lewis, and you have to ask how proven Vitali was against top contenders of his era.
This is what we have to work with. Not just regarding Vitali, but with every fighter.
Seems fair to me.I wasn't being negative, just assessing the evidence.

With the evidence considered, picking Vitali over all-time greats seems a stretch, not founded on anything other than favouritism.

It shows a lot of FAITH in a fighter whose achievements barely warrant it.

No, nuthuggers are primarily a general forum phenomenon, from where the term originated and is bandied about.
Throwing around the term "nut-hugger" may not be helpful here, I concede that.
BUT they DO exist.

On ESB general forum Vitali and Wlad have KO'd Ali, Louis, Allah, Buddha, and Moses, but were ducked by Godzilla.

Corrie Sanders is a top 10 all-time heavyweight, and Lennox Lewis shits his pants every night having nightmares about Vitali .........

This is why greatness requires a fighter to get the job done at first time of asking, esp. when facing a fighter who's on his way out.

Lewis should have retired after the Tyson fight. The fire inside left him after that. It was obvious as far back has 2000 that Lewis was only hanging around for the Tyson fight. Getting into
the thing with Vitali was silly. Lewis should never have mentioned a re-match but I cant criticize him for taking 8 months to retire. He was the champion after all.

Klitschko got a shot at the title that Lewis vacated anyway, so no complaints.

Exactly. He had no desire. Just an addiction to the ritual of fighting, and possibly an understandable greed for more money .
Lewis made the smart move, he resisted the temptation because he'd lost his edge. Other fighters should take note.

Well, he was good enough to beat Vitali Klitschko.

 

Didn't do much is a point of view. Vitlai's only two losses were vs Byrd, a former Ring Magazine #1 ranked guy, and former alpha bet champion, and Lennox Lewis, a lineal / ring magazine champion / sure fire hall of fame fighter.

Despite a severe shoulder injury that required surgery, Vitlai was well ahead on points vs a prime version of Chris Byrd.

Despite a bad cut, Vitlai was ahead of Lennox Lewis on all three cards, and might have won if the fight wasn't halted on cuts.

I also want to point out that Vitlai took both fights on less than two weeks notice, and was prepping for another opponent.

Now, if we want to be fair, how many other all time great would be able to beat Byrd with a torn rotator cuff, and survive Lewis, an all time great with a nasty cut and hard punches? Very few. And I doubt many would be up on points as Vitali was.

Absolutely. I just see an odd disconnect. I could argue that Vitlai had a harder decked stacked against him than Frazier did. Though Frazier eyes were swollen, ( not extremely swollen, and yes I have seen the final round recently ) he wasn't fighting with a useless arm, or a nasty cut as Vitlai was. Ali back in October 1975 was far cry from Ali of 1971, and nothing close to the prime Ali of the mid to late 1960's.

Next time it’s on, I'll read lips. Basically Frazier body language on his stool was of acceptance, more so than defiance. I've seen some fighters go bonkers when a fight is stopped. Frazier basically just shook his head and accepted the stoppage. Boxing is full of more bull**** from its ahteltes in interviews than any other sport. Only Frazier himself knows at that moment whether he felt like he could have made it through the 15th and final round or not. Sometimes fighters are glad their corner stops it for them. Very few fighters ever admit when their done for. What is known is this. Frazier and Ali did not like each other. Both men knew that this was their career defining fight. Frazier showed plenty of heart in the match.

1 ) If you wanted to talk positive, you would say that Vitlai Klitschko has the best KO% in the history of the glove sport, the highest ratio of rounds won to rounds lost among heavyweight champions, was never down from a punch, and fought very few fighters that had a .500 or below record. All of the above is true. If a more popular Ring legand had any of these accomplishments there are 5 additional blue stars next to his name. Instead, you chose to belittle his opponents while not mentioning the positive, hence I view that as a negative.

2 ) The reality is the chances of ring magaizne champion / lineal 190-200 pound heavyweight champion these days are slightly greater than the chances of pigs flying, and none of those guys of the past at this weight should really be viewed as a slam dunk to beat Vitlai. They could win, or they could lose. The bald truth is just too much for some fans here to phamtom. Fact reveal that many all time great heavyweight lost to lesser men than Vitlai Klitschko.

You can argue greater, but greater can be defined in many ways. See the above positive Vitlai talk as points on why he can be viewed as great.

Fans are fans. I would simply say there are more popular fighters in the classic forum, and Vitlai is not among them. I'd rather say a " nut hugger " is not an smart & experienced boxing fan.

Who said this? I think the opinions here are far better than the general forum, having said that the bias for or against fighters on film might be less in the general forum.

I disagree. Take Joe Walcott for example. More on this later.

If you want to retire, then so be it. Lewis did not act or talk like a retired fighter until the announcement came in. This was my only beef.

Diagree! Klitschko vs Lewis II would have been a PPV bonanza, and possibly a clean passing of the lineal chain.

What if Schemling didn’t re-match Louis?
What if Ingo didn't re-match Patterson?
What if Frazier didn't re-match Ali?

If the above fighters won a vacated title and never got re-matches, there are holes in both men's legacy.....especially if the re-match was the talk of boxing for months as Lewis vs Klitschko II was.

And finally it is time to come clean. Dr Z was banned for life by Kurt Vonnegutt / Iron Mike Hunt / Reggie Hammond....he was a MOD who made no bones about disliking me and banned the registration name.

Those who follow other sections of this board know that Reggie Hammond is banned for stealing/ scaming approxamelty $1,500.00 from East Side boxing posters. I highly doubt he'll be back here, and if he returns, his mod's power and the ability to ban me and many others ( which he did ) are gone. So it’s safe for me to emerge now, and continue to re-post. A select few other posters here know the deal.

 

why not, he has a solid chin and far more skill than baer can ever dream of. Max looks painfully aweful on film.

 

He lost those fights. You can argue that they weren't BAD losses, but they were losses.
I covered his injury-proneness in my first post. If someone wants to argue "fluke" against Byrd that's all good, but facts are his career was cut short with umpteen fight postponments and cancellations from injuries.
I'm all for imagining an injury-free Vitali for purpose of this thread, but he still lost to Byrd.
Didn't lose badly, and you can call it bad luck, but he didn't manage a win.(If mentioning that is another "negative" then so be it.)

Manila was fought in crazy heat, bad ventilation, a wicked pace for 14 rounds, absolutely gruelling. Ali and Frazier were hyper-exhausted, fought way beyond ordinary human athletic endurance.

Lewis-Klitschko was a relatively ordinary heavyweight title fight. Two big guys trading big shots for a few rounds, a good hard-hitting heavyweight scrap.

Manila was something else.

Ali and Frazier barely had energy to walk back to their corners, no way did Frazier have energy to get into an animated argument with Futch. The men were fighting on sheer will and and solemn competitiveness. But that's just my opinion.

I dont go much on statistics.

I dont know the corresponding stats in those categories for any of the all-time greats, it doesn't interest me, and it has never occurred to me to compare the ATGs on such criteria.

To me, I feel I would be wasting my time concentrating on such things that I dont consider particularly relevant.

Every fight is a two-horse race. And at heavyweight anything can happen.

He's not one of the greats.

Ridiculous things are said in the general forum. That's what I meant.

SOME people here are like "yes, Vitali beats a prime Tyson", but that's okay, just an opinion. Frankly, I cant see it, or any evidence for it, but that's just me. I'm really only offering opinions too.

Well, nevermind. I'm not gonna lament the fact that old Lewis didn't stay around for one last payday and a possible beating.

He'd have saved himself from a brutal beatdown !

He'd keep the title, perhaps. And save himself from being knocked the **** out.

Who cares ? The first fight was the best by far, and ample excitement. The rematches were just gravy.

With Lewis, I dont see a hole in his legacy with Vitali. Not at all. If there's any hole, it would be Bowe 1993.

With Klitschko, I dont see a significant legacy.

Hmmm. Interesting. Reggie Scammond !

 

I can see how he beats Patterson.
Floyd was vulnerable.

Frazier and Marciano were awesome fighting machines though, with superhuman stamina. Tough, tough guys.

Buster Douglas looked better that night he beat Tyson than Vitali ever looked. Douglas was a slick fighter.

Oliver McCall beat Lennox Lewis. So, you can argue that Vitali is better than McCall, I wont contradict that, but Vitali attempted to upset the SAME fighter - and failed. Maybe I'm not following your logic but I dont see how McCall's a compelling argument for Vitali's chances. It just draws attention to Klitschko's failed attempt at Lewis.

Yes, Vitali might beat the version of Muhammad Ali who lost to Leon Spinks.
But that's another thread, "Vitali Klitschko against ATGs at or near their absolute worst" ...... Oh, and we confidently pick him losing to Lewis on that one !

Seriously, Ken Norton was pretty good.

Vitali gets afforded a lot of "could haves". He failed to beat Lewis so let's demonstrate how he COULD HAVE beat Ali !

Hey, I'm not mocking what you're saying. I see some sense in it, but it might be a convoluted way of getting past the fact that Vitali left us very little substance of worth in his OWN era.
I'll be first to admit he's a real fighter, a serious challenger, and that presupposes that he "has a chance", but actually PICKING him to beat the proven greats would require more evidence.

 

There isn't one person that Marciano, Patterson or Liston beat, that Vitlai would not beat. However there is a man who beat Vitlai on cuts who could clearly beat Marciano, Patterson, and Liston.

I think Vitlai could beat Ali long before Ali meet Spinks. You and I both know this.

I agree

Vitali is a tougher fight for Ali than Norton would be, and Norton got the better of Ali in two of three fights.

Here we go again with the negative game. It’s easy to belittle opponents. We are all familiar with Monte Cox's mock of Revolver on belittling Ali's opponents. Just for fun, let's take a look at Liston. IMO, Vitlai beats anyone Liston beats and would not take guys like Whitehurst 2x, Marshal, and Summerlin 2x the distance. And speaking of Marshal, he beat Liston. Vitali only lost to two champions. Liston big wins aren't that impressive if we examine them. He knocked out a much smaller and far less durable Patterson, who had a made to order style for Sonny. Cleveland Williams only beat one contender. Williams busted Liston up in one of their fights before Liston's power once again took advantage of a less than durable heavy weight. Vadles was well past it when Sonny beat him. Folley would not be anything special today. Liston became frustrated with Machen and went low un-puropse a few times in a distance fight. See how this game works? Here's some more, Vitlai would do far better vs Ail than Liston did. And he was never badly Ko'd as Liston was either. So how exactly is Liston proven vs All time greats? He made he bones on chinny fighters, smaller fighters, lost to a journeyman once, quit a few times.

Re-matches is what Vitlai needed, and Byrd and Lewis wanted no part of them. The fact that neither Lewis or Byrd was confident enough to give them speaks volumes. Byrd was simply lucky. Vitlai proved he could beat all time great by knocking out just about everyone they put in front of him, and getting the better of Byrd and Leiws, but losing to an injury and a cut. You just can't say Vitlai did not prove his stuff in the ring. Vitlai has the highest knock out percentage in the history of boxing. He was never floored by a punch. He has the best rounds lost to round won ratio. Again, this is vs a field of 1,000’s of histories fighters. To say it’s a small accomplishment on any of these feats is not reasonable. When you merge the confluence of the three accomplishments it is impressive.

One can argue what greatness is. I could say Vitlai was in 300+ combat matches vs heavyweights. He was an amateur and professional boxing champion, as well as an amateur and professional kick boxing champion. Vitlai started his professional boxing career late, and did not hit his peak until the last few fights of his career. The skills he developed were with a 2nd rate trainer. What if Louis did not have Blackburn? What if Ali did not have Dundee? What if Marciano did not have Goldman? What if they had….Sdunek?!!! .Would they have been as great? NO WAY.

Vitali ascended to Ring Magazine Champion, never used a color line, never used a geography line, and always fought 200+ pound men. The three remarkable accomplishments he picked up along the way ( All time KO%, never down from a punch, and best rounds won to round lost ration ) can not be understated.

The simple fact is Vitlai had too much to be out boxed by smaller 180-200 pound heavyweights. Never down on the cards after three rounds in any of his fights, it is highly unlikely Vitlai would lose in a head to head match up vs boxer types….especially if they did not have excellent chins.

 

That's your opinion. And I dont agree.
You can simply state that Vitali beats everyone Marciano beat, but really you're just making it up. Speculating, inventing stuff, and passing it off as some sort of fact.

Sure, if Muhammad Ali took him lightly and came in horrible shape.

Here you go again.
Vitali is a tougher fight for Ali than Norton !
Look, everyone knows Norton's style was probably the one Ali found most difficult in his entire career, and Ali could never get used to it. But you make the cold statement that "Vitali is a tougher fight for Ali". You're just making it up.

Eddie Machen deserved to be rated number 2 or 3 contender when Liston beat him.
Floyd Patterson was the world champion when Liston beat him the first time.
Floyd Patterson deserved to be rated number 1, 2 or 3 contender when Liston beat him the second time.
Zora Folley deserved to be rated number 2, 3 or 4 when Liston beat him.
Roy Harris deserved a high ranking when Liston beat him.
Cleveland Williams was a dangerous fighter.

You can definitely argue that Liston's resume is kind of thin. That doesn't change the fact that Vitali's resume is thin, and that Vitali hardly beat anyone who deserved a top 5 ranking - maybe Corrie Sanders, that's it.

You accuse me of playing the "negative game" but you're the one who likes to say stuff like :

Show me where I've laid into Vitali's best wins in that manner ?

....... all I did was compare his win over Kirk Johnson to Bruno's win over Coetzee.
And I state that Vitali has few - if any - wins over the most significant contenders of the day.
To you, is this the equivalent of diminishing in detail all of his wins ?
Please explain where I was equally as negative.

You seem to be the one who wants to play with negativity.

The stats dont interest me.
Except the bit about the best rounds won to lost ratio - that only interests me because I find it hard to believe someone has checked the score cards of every single heavyweight fight in history and come up with that stat. Can you post a top 20 list of that stat please ?

Amateur career, kicking boxing career, and how many second-raters with numerically impressive records he beat, dont mean **** to me.
Greg Haugen had 500 tough man contests, doesn't make him a greater boxer.

Stats have never been important in boxing like they are in say baseball.

 

Bet Holyfield has a much worse rounds won-to-lost ratio than Vitali.
I'd still rate him higher, because in real terms he did more and fought (and beat) better opponents.

I do wish Vitali could've gone on to do the things it looked like he could. I wish much more could've actually happened, rather than having to use guesswork and subjecture rather than good solid evidence. Only guy to stop Vaughan Bean? Well sure, but hey - it's only Vaughan Bean. I would love to have more than we got.

Best equivalent I can think of with Vitali is ol' Ike Ibeabuchi.
He certainly looked like he ticked all the right boxes, but without those real, consistant tests and rewards against the best around then it's a real grey area and doesn't get him a top ranking (certainly no chance at all of ATG).

Head-to-head, okay, that's a different area
And the point of this thread I admit, which I'm getting a little away from...

 

Coming from a man with an obsession with punchstats.

 

Hey, that's the 3rd go at me you've had in the last 4 days. I've told you this 7 times but I'll tell you again - I am not obsessed with numbers!

 

:rofl

Vitali was decent contender who failed at the top level, and never lived up to the potential he suggested early on in his career. His inability to succeed at the top level, which was partially due to his other weakness (a flawed style, a lack of serious one-punch power and a leaky defense) led him to lose when he stepped it up.

Few have had such a rich picking displayed within so close a reach as Vitali did against Lewis; few realised that Lewis had been in decline since 2000 because his opposition had been poor since then. Nevertheless, Lewis was able to land often enough to tear Vitali a vagina in his face, and Vitali lacked the one-punch power of a Rahman or a McCall to even knock Lewis down.

I can't think of anyone in the top 10 that Vitali could beat, but from about 15-30 there are a few I'd give him a good chance against. I can see Vitali beating Floyd Patterson (if he can hit him often enough) and some other boxers conceivably, although there is a major question mark here because Vitali never faced (let alone beat) a top 30 of all time opponent (Lewis was not at that level when he beat Vitali).

 

That's a bit unfair towards Ike. He beat David Tua and Chris Byrd, who were both top 5 boxers. It's insulting towards someone with Ike's resume to compare his achievements with Vitali's.

 

Sorry, Ike.