Vitali Klitschko turns 45

I tend to agree that it's a stretch to call him lineal, but Sanders was apparently number 2 when they fought because Byrd drew with Golota, so there is a case.

 

head to head he's probably one of the best heavys that ever lived.. There are a few that I'd pick to take him - A prime Lewis being one of them. But I don't think there are very many who'd beat him, and even the few who would, would always have a tough fight with him.

 

prime lewis?

 

Yes. Given that he managed to prevail in his older rendition, it stands to reason that he'd do even better when prime..

 

You're the welcher and the liar, Tony. We both know that.

When you ask for a source, I often give it to you. Multiple times.

This time, you said they were ranked. The onus of proof is on you...if you care about your reputation. :deal

 

so old lewis is enough to stop him inside les than half distance, not prime lewis.

hence why I asked "prime lewis?".

 

And hence why I explained that "prime" Lewis would likely do better

 

Lewis did not look so old winning the re-match with Rhaman and that fight took place less than two years before Vitali vs Lewis.

The simple fact is Lewis never looked old until he meet Vitali. No one said Lewis looked old vs Tyson!

Vitali made Lewis ( age 37 ) look old, was tired due to the pace of the fight, and was ahead 4-2 on all cards. A cut, which might have been caused with an illegal backhand over Vitali's eye region was the reason the fight was halted. There is video if you want to see it.

[url]http://search.myway.com/search/video.jhtml?n=782a5957&p2=%5EBYQ%5Exdm157%5ETTAB02%5Eus&pg=video&pn=1&ptb=D87B0786-7323-4A66-A347-42153D1FC348&qs=&searchfor=lennox+lewis+backhand+vs+vitali&si=204822&ss=sub&st=tab&tpr=sbt[/url]

But Lewis was lucky. Both McCall and Rhaman gave him rematches.

But did Lewis re-match his tough fights with Mercer, Bruno or Vitali?

 

I have to disagree with this. Lennox had been declining for some time and being nearly 38 years of age and only having fought once in some 19 months wasn't helping him. Lewis was nowhere near prime when he fought Vitali.. I like Vitali too and as stated above, rated him as one of the best head to head forces of all time.. But I can't make excuses for him losing to Lewis or try to down play the incident by making Lewis look better than he was. And with all due respect, if the circumstances were reversed, and it were Vitali who was nearly 38, fighting a career high weight, and inactive, you wouldn't be making a case for him being prime.

 

Magoo,

You can disagree. I have a few qusitons for you.

Don't you consider Lewis win over Rhaman to be one of his best performances? Yes or no? I say yes, and it was less than 2 years before the Vitali fight.

Lewis did not look rusty or shot vs Tyson, and that was just a year before he meet Vitali. He was a very good older fighter who had not taken much ring punishment.

But Rhaman and Tyson were short and there to be hit. Vitali was not, so he made Lewis miss a lot.

Let's reverse the circumstances!

Vitali improved post Lewis. At age 38, I think he was a better fighter than the man who meet Lewis. Honest.

 

Well Ring Rankings were the ones most historians defer to pre 2012. By those rankings Sanders never surpassed number 3.

 

Lewis was way past his best, i wouldn't waste my time debating such a fact. Think Holmes - Spinks and the like.

 

That's true for the annual rankings. I just wonder about the issue before the fight. Do you have it?

 

I actually rank his wins over Ruddock, Golata, Morrison and Grant above that performance. It looked good because he was avenging a loss.. But Rahman wasn't that good and the fact that Lewis lost the first time was an indication that the light was starting to flicker even if he DID win the second time around.. And its also worth mentioning that two years is a long time in boxing, especially for aging opponents who can look outstanding in one fight, then drop into the abyss against a journeyman six months later.

Again, he was facing a lesser opponent, and one who was arguably further past his best than Lewis was, which certainly helps to field a good performance.. And again, a 12 month period with no activity, then coming back at a career high weight can certainly having a baring on his very next fight which I believe it did. Lewis was a man who historically had no problems going into the later rounds. He was positively exhausted after 4-5 rounds with Vitali.

Agree and disagree. He was arguably still the best heavyweight in the world.. But this does not mean that he was at his OWN personal pinnacle.. Sort of Like Holmes in 1985.. He was still the undefeated reigning champion, but I doubt any reasonable or knowledgeable fan or expert viewed him as prime in 1985.. And I disagree about Lewis not taking much wear and tear. He was KO'd in one of his more recent fights and for the second time in his career. He fought several hard battles with men like Evander Holyfield, Ray Mercer, Frank Bruno, etc.. Not to mention having a lengthy amateur career and literally thousands of hours of sparring.

I agree. Vitali's height assisted him against Lewis where as some of his other opponents didn't have this luxury.. But was this the first time that Lewis fought and beat a man who was over 6'5" ? No it wasn't.. He actually beat a few guys of that description and with far less difficulty years earlier.

This is hardly a reversal. And I don't think Vitali improved.. he was fighting lesser opposition in that comeback and in some cases being taken the distance by men who he might have traditionally KO'd. Do you think that a 2003 Vitali Klitschko would have been extended 12 rounds with a 2011 Shannon Briggs ( or whatever year it was that they fought? ) Do you think that most or all of those guys were anywhere near as good as even that diminished 37 year old version of Lewis? I doubt it. Do you think that a 37 year old, four year retired Vitali could have come out and done to a 2003 Lewis what he did to Sam Peter? I wouldn't bet on it. I mean seriously.. If Juan Carlos Gomez had beaten Vitali in 2009, I doubt you be sitting here seven years later saying that he was an improved fighter from his first career.

 

Grant wasn't very good and Lewis held and uppercuted him to end it. Golota on that night wasn't mentally ready to be in the ring.

Rhaman was better than both of those guys. The Ruddock KO was impressive, but then again who did Ruddock really beat? Morrison was badly over matched.

Yes, he was, because of the pace of the fight. Lewis had no stamina issues with Tyson, and that was more rounds.

Lewis did not have many tough fights. Mercer, Bruno, and Vitali is pretty much it. I'd hardly call either fight with Holyfield a battle.

Lewis was too good to get hit often and too chinny to take a beating

Holmes in 1985 had less than Lewis did in 2003.

Did you ever hear Lewis talk about retirement? NO, he wasn't thinking of such until the WBC ordered the re-match. So in his mind he wasn't past it, and like I said he looked very good vs Rhaman and Tyson.

Yes, Vitali's height and mobility played a factor, as did his jab and countering. This is why Lewis looked bad. If you look at Lewis career, good jabbers like Mercer could give him trouble.

Lewis never fought man over 6'5" with these type of skills. I assure you if Lewis KO'd Kirk Johnson in four rounds that night, none of his fans would say he was shot.

Most think Vitali became a better fighter post-Lewis, myself included.

Odd comment as Gomez didn't and pretty much won just one round! Vitali's win over Peter and Adamek were among his best performances....way past the Lewis fight.