Is Vitali really an H2H monster?

I got that from a Google search, which can be wrong, sorry about that.
Ironically as technology is supposedly always being perfected, this year I have become aware of how inaccurate it can be.
Like even in the same Google search, I have seen 3 different answers.
Adam Sandler's shoes size came back as a 16, 5 sizes to large & absurd for someone 5'9" & change.
I have gotten answers to simple questions like what % of adult men can do a single strict form chin up from .05 to near 50%.
Recently I checked for what % can do 1 vs. 6 good chin ups: & the former was a higher % than the latter, completely illogical!

Still, would you not say that those guys in the top 10 were "very good" fighters?
Then we should consider if anyone else was-sometimes rankings are not the most accurate, but it cuts both ways-a lower ranking man might have been better at that time.

 

It could be quoting the rankings from the likes of the belt organisations.

But most people when assessing a fighters resume normally quote the Ring Magazine Ratings.

And @MaccaveliMacc has done all the research on it and has a detailed thread on it. So if he says Vitali is 6-2 against top 10 ranked opposition then I'll take his word for it.

Would I say the fighters Vitali beat were very good ? Well I guess that's down to your criteria some people see it differently.

For me personally no or they didn't prove it enough to be classed as very good.

Someone like Corrie Sanders for example is fast, powerful, and a southpaw. In regards to eye test at his best he could be deemed as very good. But he didn't prove it enough against notable opponents to be classed as very good if that makes sense.

Vitali coming off a lay off and beating Samuel Peter is a good achievement but I wouldn't class Peter as a very good opponent to me hes just good.

Adamek could be classed as very good based on being a 2 weight world champion. But would you class Adamek as a very good Heavyweight ? That's the question.

Put it this way I don't think Vitali beat anyone I would class as upper echelon.

He beat some good/solid fighters but for me his resume in regards to his best opponents isn't that great.

I felt like there was quite a few opponents Vitali missed out on that could've improved his resume significantly.

Byrd rematch
Haye
Valuev
Povetkin

Etc.

 

But then on the flipside we also can't count on Vitali winning because he never come close to beating anyone on Lewis's level.

Vitali is an unknown quantity in regards to beating an opponent on that level.

So if you're saying im assuming Lewis could win in the 2nd half of the fight. Even though there's plenty of evidence of Lewis doing so in his past fights.

Then it's an even bigger assumption to assume Vitali could beat a fighter on Lewis's level when he never came close to actually doing so in his career.

People like to bring up Lewis was behind on points after 6 rounds but that's not something that was alien to him.

He had to deal with that a few times in his career and he always passed the test.

Lewis's weakness was that he could sometimes get complacent and get caught with right hands. But Vitali landed multiple right hands on Lewis without dropping him.

So if Lewis already took Vitali's best right hands and Lewis was starting to get back in the fight. Then it's going to be a major obstacle to outpoint Lewis when he was never outpointed in his career.

 

You make a good case!
Except I think you meant to say that I was assuming Lewis could not win in the 2nd half-you said that about yourself, when you clearly think he could win.

I do not think it is necessarily a big or bigger assumption that Vitali could win-when he was ahead, & while Lewis was coming back he looked even more tired than Vitali, factoring in how few rounds Lewis lost to all fighters he ever fought, his kickboxing & amateur record...

But either guy could have pulled it out-again if Vitali was not cut so badly.

Also while Vitali had a great KO record, one of the best ever, most now he is more of an accumulation of damage fighter.
So the fact that he did not end Lewis early is very typical & should be expected-especially if a guy has a good ir better chin, which Lewis *usually* did.

Vitali's high work rate is a major asset.
It could have gone either way, I do not think we can fairly assume the result either way.
Nor

 

I might put this cat amongst your pigeons...for me, beating Vitali was Lewis BEST win. At that point sure Vitali was an unknown quantity but I think beating him is more of an achievement than beating old Tyson, past peak Evander, Bruno, Briggs etc... Maybe destroying Ruddocl the way he did was contextually as impressive, but a win over Vitali, even on a cut, is a hugely impressive win...

 

He's hard to accurately rate because he faced very few elite/notable fighters. The ones he did face, Byrd and Lewis, he lost to them but he also looked good while losing and there were big asterisks for those fights (Byrd didn't beat him up, some people had Vitali ahead before the shoulder injury and Lewis was behind before stopping Vitali on cuts).

On the other hand, he dominated most of the rest of his competition. Arreola, Peter, and Chisora became target practice as he unloaded on them for more than half a dozen rounds. Chisora in particular was impressive because Vitali was old with one foot out the door for retirement and Chisora would go on to have a lengthy career with some good wins. The Sanders win was also impressive, but Sanders was out of shape and didn't really have his heart in boxing anymore.

So it's fitting that where Vitali rates h2h is awkward and hard to figure out because he himself was awkward and hard to figure out in the ring. You're talking about a guy who was:

-Tall
-Leaned back to avoid punches
-Had a huge gas tank able to throw a high volume of shots
-Good jab (when he chose to use it)
-A solid chin
-Pretty damn strong
-Decent ring general ship and fundamentals

But he was also:

-A bit uncoordinated
-Not exactly a defensive wizard and could be tagged
-Lacked versatility/punch selection
-Would sometimes be willing to brawl
-Not particularly fast
-Not a great finisher and didn't have tremendous power despite his size and strength
-Could suffer from cuts

Overall, Vitali would be a problem for a lot of past and present fighters at his best. But h2h "monster?". I don't quite see that. Difficult day in the office for most guys doesn't=would likely win the vast majority of hypothetical fights with other boxers. Those are two very different things.

For example, at their best, guys like Tim Witherspoon or Alexander Povetkin would be a decent challenge for most boxers in hypothetical matchups, but I wouldn't call them borderline unbeatable "monsters". Nothing Vitali did suggests he would be a nightmare for the majority of elite heavyweights across 100 years. His relatively mediocre resume simply doesn't display that.

To give even more details, let's look at a hypothetical top 10 h2h list (in no particular order)

Ali
Lewis
Holmes
Liston
Tyson
Usyk
Holyfield
Foreman
Louis
Wladmir

Out of those 10, I wouldn't comfortably favor Vitali to beat any of them except Holyfield on an off-night or an unmotivated older Liston.

 

Yes he is and I was not a fan whatsoever. Technically I didn't like him but he'd throw 100 punches a round, all heavy jabs and rights with an 80 inch reach thrown from a 6'7 height. He dominated everyone bar a 37yo Lennox who he gave hell. And Lennox would rather retire than fight a rematch.

He'd beat everyone pre Ali. He'd overwhelm them with his range, workrate and strength.

Ali and Holmes have speed and skill over him, but have disadvantages to overcome

I think he's too big for Frazier and Tyson

I think he has too much outboxing skill for Foreman while having a good chin

Holyfield went 1-4 against SHWs

Bowe got outboxed by Tubbs and Golota - picking Vitali there

Lennox beat him and he'd always give Lennox a good fight but Lennox is a far better puncher.

Fury-Vitali is a pickem and Vitali would outbox AJ and not get ko'd by him so AJ likely folds at some stage

Vitali ducked Fury though and Wlad ducked Fury for 3-4 years. Vitali fought Chisora coming off a loss to Fury

 

Its not just that he lost to Byrd , the most glaring aspect of that loss is the fact Byrd took the fight on a weeks notice and entered the ring without ever seeing any footage of Vitali.
He had to enter the ring , eye up Vitali and devise a game-plan right there in the moment.
Byrd is doing the bare minimal and Vitali still can't put a dent in him. Vitali is "dominating" because Byrd is downloading the data. Vitali still couldn't land a thudding blow to even put a dent in him. He can't even hurt him , stunlock him..nothing.. And people think he could beat Usyk lol.

Riddick Bowe can do everything that version of Lewis did and do it better. Vitali has no defence for the right hand over the top and Bowe would pound him with that and the uppercut. Vitali has no inside game , none. Nobody with anything to lose would pick Vitali over Bowe who can do everything Lewis did and more.

 

I appreciate the time and effort you put into this post, but I respectfully disagree with what you're trying to prove.

First off, Vits beat some good fighters. Really good fighters would have been Povetkin, Chagaev, Haye. But he didn't fight any of those men instead choosing a much easier path against fighters with records that looked nice, but hadn't really been tested in most cases. While his brother fought the best of the era, Vits career appeared to be carefully mapped out.

Second. Vits only fought 18 top 10 ranked fighters if you want to use the corrupt ABC organization that get paid.. I prefer to use Ring rankings and that takes it down to 6. Thats 3x less than your number.

Third. H2h is a ridiculous assumption, just like fantasy fights. Sure they're fun, but the leave to much out or assume to much. For instance...you brought up fighters from the past. You make the assumption they wouldn't be competitive because the were to small. How do you know they would be to small? Unless you're suggesting Vits is traveling back in time or those past fighters are magically traveling to the future you have left out a lot of factors. We'll use Jack Dempsey as an example. Had Dempsey been born in the 1970's he would have had treated medical care and nutrition, sports science and supplements. Hence he would have been a much bigger man today than he was in his oin time. Now let's flip the script. Had Vits been born in what is now the Ukraine in the late 1800's it's likely he would have face starvation in his life and little professional medical care. No sports science, no supplements, no professional boxing at that time in that part of the world. He would undoubtedly be much smaller with little to no boxing experience.

If you ignore all of this you could definitely say Vits would be great in other eras, or a h2h "monster". But if you look at the reality it's not quite that simple.

Hence I stand by my point that fantasy fights or h2h comparisons across eras are just fun fantasy fuelled by what whoever is arguing what wants, and not what realistically is, which is an unprovable point.

 

Lmao

 

So Vitali also had a week's notice...?

 

Bowe is perhaps my no1 H2H monster based on nothing but supposition and feelings. Kid was a monster in his brief, incandescent brightness. But he was gone in a heartbeat...

 

Sure he did. But he didn't have to fly half way around the world and give up 6" in height and nearly 40lbs in weight. In other words, everything was stacked in his favor and he still quit......and never tried to rematch.

 

OK you have some good points!
Even if they can be argued either way, I was unfamiliar with where the 18 top 10 ranked fighters came from, thanks for the facts.

I also do not know if Vitali actively avoided some boxers, or his management steered him away from the best fighters.
Of all the debates on here I had not heard the reasons he fought who, maybe you are correct about that, or others have different interpretations?

But anyway the question is how good those he fought were.
Of course "good" vs. "really good" in inherently both vague, generally descriptive, & subject to interpretation.
I will leave it to others who may want to support-or oppose-the idea that some of those highly ranked fighters were really good or not.
While still maintaining that-to put it another way-I cannot see a HW that is not an ATG at least in H2H match ups so rarely losing rounds against who he fought.

Regarding the issue of past champions-& Vitali or anyone without modern training, I think you have fallen prey to a basic misapprehension.
Sure a Dempsy might have been bigger & better-or fought as a rehydrated LHW-but the question of who is how good against each other is never supposed to be what guys COULD have been.

That is irono=ically far more speculative.
Someone like Marciano would suffer because his great endurance would decline, he would get even slower...But H2H dos & should mean how well a man, reincarnated or as he was, would do.

The only corrections should be for an even playing field-such as fighting under a neutral rule set, since one is not intrinsically more real.
Or split the fight conditions.
AND in division match ups, you must be fair to past fighters by not battling under a NAME of a division, but real, in ring weight.
Imagine SRR who tended to weigh no more than the mid 140's as a WW coming in at 130.
Or Duran at 125, again, rehydrated.

Oh one more thing: to be fair to the older guys you gotta give them the KNOWLEDGE & film of the later generations.You cannot change their training or give them new science, but it is not an even playing field if just due to the forward directional flow of time later dudes know all about & have seen their predesessors styles & tendencies.

Already many older guys faced harder lives & schedules.
So they get the same camp & fight as often as later guys or vice versa: so Greb does not get to cheat with rough house tactics, but he also does not have to save himself for another fight in a week or two!