Rating Klitchsko as an ATG

McGrain,

Since Wlad and Vitali often occupy the top two spots, there is a limited opportunity to beat the 3rd best man. Would you agree?

Some say the 3rd best man is Haye, and he won't fight either Klitschko. In fact he won't even fight the last WBA champ who never lost the WBA title in the ring in Chagaev. Instead, Haye is fighting an old and already exposed Audley Harrison.

Many agree that Wlad is a top level fighter. I agree. Take note, Vitali easily defeated two fighters who beat Wlad ( Purrity and Sanders ), and blew out another one who had his share of moments in Peter. Vitali is 3-0, and 3 KO's here.

 

I'm glad you agree. With Wlad or Vitali often being #1 and #2, there are limited with fights vs. #3. In this case #3 won't fight either. So your benchmark in this case is not a revealing statistic.

The other problem is one a contender fights either Klitschko, he typically vaults down the ratings scale. I don't much difference between #3 and #8. A better way to look at it is how many title defenses a fighter make, and how many top ten fighters have they beaten.

Vitali owns wins over former alphabet title holders in Hide, Sanders ( Who beat the current #1 Wlad ), and Peter. If he fights Valuev or Haye next, it will be 4 alphabet champions beaten.

Currently Vitali has beaten 10 fighters who at one time were in the Ring Magazine's Top Ten, and holds a very good 11-2 record in world title fights.

 

Agreed. In this case Vitali was the one seeking the re-match. Lewis was forced to re-match or lose his belt, and Byrd said " no thanks ". Both fighters did not fancy their chances. Lewis has a confirmed 18 million dollar purse. This to me suggests Vitali would have won both re-matches. No worse than 1-1 for sure.

What if Rhaman or McCall did not re-match Lewis? Same thing, we rate Lewis lower.

 

Just to clarify: I won't dismiss such statistics, but I don't think it's be-all-end-all, either. As do you, I presume.

I do have to agree with Mendoza on the point that ratings can sometimes be somewhat misleading. For instance, I believe Michael Grant was the #1 ring contender when Lewis fought him. Pretty sure he was top3, at worst. But was he honestly better than, say, Morrison, Bruno or Ruddock, who were ranked lower when Lewis fought them?

 

atschatsch

No way Vitali is tougher. Vitali is one of the most fragile heavyweights of all time. He hates pain, and quits under adversity. Wlad may have a weak chin, but he never quits like Vitali. Skillwise, Wlad is leagues above Vitali.

 

Sanders, Lewis, Byrd and Peter were top3 when he fought them. Hopefully Old Fogey will pick up on this thread and start a new one to compare ~15 champions and their top3 fights, because I'm a bit too busy now.

 

Yep and Vitali posted a fantastic 2-2 record :roll:

Wlad's record against top 3 contenders is 3-0.

 

Why is such a big deal made about Lewis not rematching Vitali? He was clearly past it. Some 'legacy boost' by beating an old champ who is well past his best. Lennox TKO6 Vitali.

 

Thank you. It's not a big deal. Mendoza is so adamant about Vitali not getting the rematches he deserves. He had his chance with not only Lewis, but Byrd. And I heard Byrd was required to fight Wlad due to the slave-contracts these Klit brothers force on their opponents. So my understanding is Byrd didn't refuse but didn't have a chance other than to fight Wlad.

 

It says a lot about the calibre of fighter Vitali is if he needs a second chance at beating a past it, out of shape champion. Not in the same class as the greats. No proof for otherwise. Lennox TKO6 Vitali.