I love how the delusion in these parts has reached the level where Buddy Baer- who never boxed a day in his life till his bro was champ- then gets fed chumps with losing records and/or who he outweighed by 50 pounds, beats guys who are bigger, stronger and have more amateur pedigree, in many cases above vastly more. He would have a punchers chance against Rahman and that's about it. The rest of those we have spoke of have tough beards and would box circles around him if not stop him.
Buddy Baer was actualy a prety good fighter. His power was arguably better than either Klitschko and he had good all round textbook skills. He knocked out Abe Simon who was bigger than most of the recent beltholders and certainly more durable so I don't buy the argument that he just feasted on smaller fighters. Campolo, Blunt and Brackey were all at least fringe contenders who were 220 lbs or more.
Then again wasn't Buddy Baer around 18 years old when he started? Not too old for a heavyweight atleast. He did knock over some decent opposition, certainly not any worse than the men Briggs and Tye Fields beat to build up their first round KO records. I have his fight against Jack Doyle from 1935, when Baer was just 20 years old, and he doesn't look too bad there for a fighter of relative inexperience. He had size, some ability and a big punch.
Briggs is more relevant than Fields here because he went all the way to the top. I think that among heavies who were ranked, Buddy Baer is in the top three for first round knockouts allong with Jack Dempsey and Shannon Briggs.
In my book, power is only as good as it is applied... i.e the results the power yields... i.e. stoppages. Vitali has stopped all but two opponents. Practically all of his opponents were modern sized heavies that would have been giants in the 30's.
And practically all of them were less than top class. He has met one great fighter who was getting on in years and who stopped him.
The same as Baer though, a lot of them were shite. Still, I agree with you that even if we were to agree Buddy Baer was the harder puncher, we would both recognise Vitali as a better puncher. The bottom line for me is that Baer would be one of Vitali's more impressive scalps, had he beaten him. He wouldbe amongst the leading fighters on his list. That is what we disagree about.
Spot on. There is no need to inflate Buddy Bear's ability. What we have here is the usual panic button response when someone's favorite fighter sufferers an embarrassing moment by a far lesser fighter.
That type of sweeping generalisation helps you about as much as completely mis-representing said embarrassing moment did.
as long as seamus and mendoza are present this thread wont die, talk about a pair of butthurt klit fans lol, just let it go already. look at the polls for christ sake!!
Reply to Mendoza. Nowhere in my post did I suggest that Baer was better than Vitali, just that he was better than you ,and others make him out. The fact that you got the circumstances of the Louis knockdown wrong is no big deal ,though you might have admitted you were totally mistaken to McGrain as it was he who put the clip up.What is more important is your line" Baer allmost beat Louis" , plainly that was never the case, he did not appear to be in any distress at all to me. You say that posters have inflated Baer's ability, to be honest I have found you guilty of this on several occasions when hyping up some of the Klits opposition, when they are patently journeymen.I actually like the Klit bros ,they are clearly the best out there ,but they are big fish in a very little pond. Vitali's resume is so thin it is almost transparent.