I have heard the argument that Vitali is in the top echelon of all time heavyweights, but why? Does beating Adamek, sosnowski, kingpin, nipples and squeaking by Del Boy (one more round and he was getting stopped) really merit a top heavyweight?? Don't forget - renowned ped cheat (actually tested positive), quit in a fight he was easily winning, and smashed up by old Lewis In all honestly just based on his comeback and number of defenses, he could probably just make 25-30 ( being honest and subjective)
Yeah, I'd have him at either between 23 and 25, but I think he'd beat most of the guys ranked around him. 30 - Sam McVey 29 - Joe Jeanette 28 - Max Baer 27 - Bob Fitzsimmons 26 - Rid**** Bowe 25 - Vitali Klitschko 24 - Peter Jackson 23 - Gene Tunney 22 - Ken Norton 21 - Max Schmeling Of these i think i'd only pick Bowe to beat him peak-for-peak and that's far from a given. Baer might be interesting.
Resume wise it should have been much better. But h2h I'd only pick a handful of fighters to beat him.
That sounds about right. And I don't think people realize how huge this is. Vitali is among the 25 best HWs who ever lived. That's a huge achievement. People here make it sound that if you are not top 10 ATG you're a complete bum.
I wish we could assign rep points like they do on some sites now, because this is a huge commnet. According to boxrec there have been 27,167 heavyweight boxers since the introduction of Queensbury rules, and there are undoubtedly thousands whose names are lost. Of these thousands, Vitali is about the 25th best.
He very well may slip into the top 20. But certainly no more. Wladimir is much, much greater than his big brother.
Honestly Povetkin's top wins stack up nicely to Vitali's. I would argue that the gap between Vitali and Povetkin as "second best HW of the era" is actually quite narrow. Closer than most would believe on a casual thought.
One could argue that if Tyson fury wins the rematch against wlad, that Tyson has a better resume than Vitali...