Is Vitali really an H2H monster?

Factual observations.

 

For clarity, I am not dismissing anyone who disagrees with me, I was asked for my opinion and am happy to share it and debate it. For me Vitali was a hard, hard man and for the reasons cited. Others disagree and for the reasons they cite. Good craic!!

 

I agree Bruno, a huge favourite of mine, did very well, but disagree he did 'better', nor in my opinion did Zelko. I actually watched that fight the other day and Lewis won wide, he battered the Croat in the later rounds and the cards reflected how one sided the fight was. For me, Lewis toughest fights were Bruno and Mercer, the Mercer win being debatable, and the two Holyfield fights were much closer than history suggests, but the Vitali fight was a great way to go out. Out toughing and ultimately physically outlasting a younger, fitter man. Not a pretty performance and I'd suggest the punishment Lewis took in that fight went someway to convincing him it was time for the pipe and slippers...I'm sure Vitali was ahead 4 rounds to 2 over the 6 completed, and on all cards?

 

Logic determines Mercer succeeds where Vitali failed.

 

It's not a triangle theory. You base Vitali's H2H monster status on the fact that he LOST to an out of shape Lewis. Cetrainly, if this logic is applies, and if out of shape Lewis is a measuring stick, Rahman should be even better, right? Yes, Rahman capitalized on Lewis' achilles. Why a H2H monster couldn't do it? Yes, Lewis had to come back through adversity in this fight, and did. But he couldn't come back in Rahman fight.

Yeah, H2H credentials are not based on one fight. But Vitali didn't beat anyone of significance in his career, so really there is literally no leg to stand on when it comes to real results to back up the H2H monster status, comparing to other ATGs. Remember, there is always a reason why a fighter won't fight top opposition.

 

Yup, but Harold Lederman had it 3-3. Doesn't matter tho, Vitali got stopped.

 

I also think Mercer on his best day is a H2H nightmare for most heavyweights...because H2H is a moveable feast of debate, discussion and opinion and fascinating because our opinions are proveably unproveable but endlessley, entertainingly debatable!

 

Absolutely. Lennox won that fight, and showed tremdous grit in doing so..I said as much previously!

 

Please man, I don't base it on that one loss, I have said why I think he is a H2H nightmare, and I'm not gonna write it all out again..you disagree and brother, that is golden. Absolutely no problems with that and happy to agree to disagree.

Take care, have a wonderful evening, Px

 

Always nice to agree to disagree in peace

 

What are you talking about? This is WHY Vitali is tough H2H because he wasn't knocked out 2x by 1 punch. We're basing his H2H status on his entire career. He was still smashing skulls at 41 years old. Get it through your head - Lewis was supposed to keep fighting after Vitali. He didn't have some long career. He had 44 fights - not much. He wasn't that old - he was 37.

 

He is tough, but being tough doesn't make you a H2H monster. McCall was never dropped either AND he beat Lewis. So I guess he a monster too, better than Vitali. Vitali was smashing skulls of second and third tier HWs for majority of his career, even at 41. Lewis was flip flopping about the retirement, before and after the Klitschko fight. It doesn't matter anyway, he stopped Vitali in his prime while being in a worst shape of his career himself.

 

It’s hard to say. I keep hearing that this was the worst Lennox of his career; following that logic, McCall, Mercer, Rahman, Bruno, and even Mavrovic—none of whom could be called H2H monsters—performed better against a superior version of Lennox. By this reasoning, Vitali ranks far behind them.

 

No

His claim to fame is that he got stopped by an overweight shot Lennox Lewis