Is Vitali Kiltschko an all time top 10 heavy weight?

It isn't a question of errors. It is what criteria one thinks is most important. Meeting and beating the best available rates at the top for me. Consistency is next.

Tunney has a better argument than Dempsey for beating the best out there, as he beat Dempsey and Greb, and he was very consistent. Marciano also rates high in beating the best available and consistency. Vitali lost twice but was otherwise very consistent, but the big hole in his case is never beating the best out there. Just my take with my criteria. Vitali though has one edge on all of them, including Jeff. Longevity. He was good longer.

I just thought it odd you lumped Marciano with Tunney rather than Dempsey with Tunney.

 

Yeah. The Klitschkos make the usual idiots really uncomfortable don’t they? The ONLY brothers to win all the major titles.

DEAL WITH IT

 

Stiverne realistically ability wise wasn't top 5 maybe not top 10

 

He was rated #2 by Ring and was the WBC World Champion. But I agree, context matters. Thats why the basis for this thread put forward by mendoza is poop. Weirdly enough the ring ratings mean much in the joe jouis thread

 

Zouski was a top contender for around 10 minutes until he ran into the legend that is Leroy Boone! Incidentally I have both those guys in my top 10,000 heavyweights of all time…!

 

In addition to Lewis, Wladmir, Tua, and Povetkin, he could have fought Haye (who called him out), Toney, Chambers, and could have rematched Byrd. A win against those names alone would pretty much guarantee a top 10 or possibly even top 5 ranking depending on the results and when the fights are made.

 

I agree. You can't act like ring rankings are the end all be all and then back peddle saying Stiverne was trash even though he was ranked.

Chris Arreola was also ranked pretty high by ring. I had this discussion with Janitor a while ago and he finally admitted the flaw in ignoring context and fixating solely on rankings.

 

Me too. Zouski and Boone were absolute beasts. I’d give them both a shot at beating Ali

 

I hate to say this but his time off from boxing for politics and the back spur derailed some of his best years. I viewed him as the better Klitschko, teddy atlas would say he's more 'reliable". Little brother wlad did much more to carve out a legacy. Vitali was a head to head monster, giving Lennox Lewis all he could handle. Wlad may have had more boxing skills but big brother was a stone cold killer in the ring.

 

Emmanuel Steward said: they're the stone Statue and the clay statue. The stone statue is much more difficult to mold and forge since the material is already hard, but it's more durable and lasts longer. To make a clay statue is much easier since the material is very malleable and softer, but it also breaks easier.

In other words, Vitali was less talented and a little harder to teach, but he was more durable and reliable at the end of the day. Wladmir was more talented, picked up on things faster, etc but was more fragile and didn't have as much of a true fighter's spirit.

That's why it's so difficult to determine who was "better". I rate Wladmir higher on legacy, but whose better overall (skill+legacy+h2h etc) is a little trickier.

 

No. His resume is too weak, he was one of the two only great heavyweights of his era. And the only other one was his brother!

 

NO, hundreds came before him... these crazy listings have got to stop.

 

I like to think that of myself and the people I first became aware of on the forum, we have shown that as we age we do not so much change/evolve/devolve as we do become more ourselves. This thread proves it. I have forgotten whatever point I was trying to make and therefore I am just going to hit the 'Post Reply' button. That's my instinct. Post now, think about what I should've said later.