Is it possible for Vitali Klitschko to become top 25 ATG hvywt Champ?

Vitali has always had the potential to become something reall great. Unfortunately Lewis retired and left him in an incredibly weak era, and also the injuries have hampered him so much that he had to take a prolonged absense from the sport. With hude obstacles like that you don't really know how far he'll ultimately climb in the ATG heavyweight rankings. It's kind of sick for me to think this, but I'm hoping he can fight his brother and ****ing smash him like we all know he could and take his rightful place at the top of the heavyweight division.

 

Vitaly is 3 times champion. Why in hell Ken Norton who wasn't a champion ranked in top 20?

 

His resume is ****.

Who has he beat, Danny williams?

 

And another thing, Vitali, nor Wladimir are 'three time champions'

They are three time TITLISTS, Vitali has only ever held a paper title, whereas
Wlad's current title is a unification of two paper titles so is a little better.

It is downright disrespectful to call them multiple time champions, it disrespects the fighters who held the great title when there was only ONE belt, and the fighters who unified and held the undisputed title. Makes me sick.

 

r u kidding?

top 10?

he has one of the worst resumes ever. to be an atg consideration, you have to have been some ATGs

name 1 he has beat? Danny Willams? Corrie Sanders? Rahman? Peter? thats the best he has fought.... his resume is much like your name JOE AVERAGE

 

Because Ken Norton would box Vitali's ears off.

Who is there on Vitali's resume that shows he could hang with the likes of Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Holmes, PRIME Lewis, Louis, etc.?

An out of shape semi-retired Lennox Lewis busted Vital's face up so bad it would have been rated X if the tv executives knew what was coming.

 

Absolutely.

To think he can't reach the top 25 is f****n ******ed.

If he beats Gomez by KO (which most ppl think will happen) he will be 37-2 w/ 36 KOs.

*He will have defended his belt 4 times
*One of a handful of HW champions to never have been knocked down
*The best KO % for a HW champion

Those things right there have him in the top 25 as it is now.

*Another thing, ppl want to say he is not the Champion; he is the champion, if you win won of the 4 recognized belts you are a champion*

You can't blame the fighter, you can blame the system tho

 

Surely you can see the difference, as you couldn't even type your argument without distinguishing between "The Champ" and "a champ."

Talent-wise, Vitali may be incredible, but he just doesn't have the accomplishments to stand aside the all-time greats. He may have a better argument in a few years, but it's only a fan-based argument that would put him in the discussion of standing alongside, say, Floyd Patterson based on heavyweight legacy at this precise moment.

 

there are 25 hall of famers from the HW division...if you feel vitalai should be in the HOF, then he is lock at top 25

 

You don't know who I'm comparing him to. I'm not comparing him to Ruslan, Wlad, or Valuev. I'm comparing him to champions of the past.

What I'm saying is everyone who has a belt is considered THE champion.

It's so difficult to judge champions of the past against champions today (relative to accomplishments) because of the belt situation.

It's unfair to say that a belt holder (using these terms interchangeably champion, titlist, etc.) is not considered THE champion because of the way the system is set-up.

(E.G.) A belt holder would have to defeat three other fighters to become THE champion by today's standards which is EXTREMELY difficult.

*The other sanctioning bodies will impose mandatories to block unification
*Fighter A might not want to fight Fighter B

 

no way mike tyson is number 2 atg

 

I highlighted your previous comment purely for the The Champ vs. a champ distinction, but the rest was more general, particularly since I had read someone already had him around 15 all time.

That being said, I'd argue the reverse regarding belts and champions: it's unfair to consider every beltholder as THE champ because it dilutes the system and the meaning of the word Champion.

Unifying the 4 "major" belts would make it easier to say someone is The Champ, but most people don't require that. Besides, some people (including Wladimir Klitschko) are bringing the IBO belt into discussion as a legitimate belt. So there's another way to be champ now? What if I anoint the winner of Chambers-Peter the IBG (International Boxing, um, Group!) Champ?

No one would respect that as legitimate, but that's what's happened to boxing, so we've had to deviate from the old tradition of belt = champ. In today's age, linearity is the ultimate indicator, with The Ring belt and unifications as fallbacks when linearity is dissolved.

Vitali is not The Champ. The WBC could strip him tomorrow and hand over the belt to Maskaev, and that wouldn't make him champ. Sure, it would in his eyes or to some delusional fans, but not in the pure sense of the word, the way that actually matters.

 

These guys conveniently look past facts like that.

 

Go cry in your corn flakes..................