Vitali Klitschko vs. D. Jones, J Young and M Spinks

Mendoza

"Pro boxing is different and Vitali had not been pro for long."

This I find an incredibly weak argument.

I checked Vitali's record. He started as a pro kick boxer and had 35 fights.

Then he had an amateur boxing career which almost led him to the Olympics, but he failed a drug test.

His record as an amateur was 195-15.

You flip-flop on amateur records from one post to another. You use the amateur record positively now and then pointing to how well grounded they are, but now you are basically saying an extensive amateur career doesn't matter much.

Now as a pro.

Vitali had 27 professional fights. He had won the European championship and defended it twice. He then won the WBO world championship and defended it twice before meeting Byrd.

Now this is a man within three months of his 29th birthday, had been a pro boxer for over three years. and was fighting his fourth world championship fight.

I find it incredible and totally unconvincing to use inexperience as an excuse for this man and this fight.

It is nothing unusual for a young fighter on the way up stumbling against a veteran who knows how to survive and make them miss. For example, Louis against Brown. Marciano against Lowry. Patterson against Maxim. Foreman against Peralta. Etc. It is part of learning.

But to get all the way to being world champion and claim inexperience?

 

Just watched it again, ED

You could make a case for giving round 4 to Byrd. It was his best round till then, but it could be awarded either way.

There was no other round that you could reasonably give to Byrd. The script was the same each round. Klitschko coming forward, throwing and landing more, dictating the pace, interrupted ever once in a while by Chris bursting forth for a few seconds with a flurry that ran counter to the overall flow.

8-1 at the time of stoppage.

Vitali could have coasted to a clear UD.

And only Vitali knows whether it was wise to end matters there. He has a doctorate in sports medicine, and knew what was the state of his shoulder. He may have felt that three more rounds would damage it beyond repair. He was 29 and still had some years left.

He did have two separate surgeries subsequently to repair it.

That's why I mentioned an asterisk earlier.

This is hardly a good indicator of who might have beaten Klitschko, based on Byrd's performance in which he was close to being shut out.

 

And he took an a polar opposite type of opponent. From an old Ruddock to a youthful Chris Byrd. Whole different set of boxing attributes between those two. what other manager/promoter doesn't go after an easy to hit plodder instead of a trickster southpaw? They are not given any credit for taking the toughest path instead of the easiest path which would have beeen an old face first heavy.

 

He'd stop Jones and win wide against Young and Spinks in really boring fashion.

 

The 4th was one of Vitali's strongest rounds for me.

Both Lederman and I gave Byrd the 5th and 7th rounds.

I differ from you guys in giving Byrd the 9th, but I feel justified in doing so re-watching it. Several rounds were close, and I gave Byrd one of them, the 3rd.

Scoring a fight is totally subjective. What matters to me is how many punches land and how effective they are. Vitali was just missing, and the final compubox totals of 132 to 124 punches landed was about what I would have expected.

Anyway if I were scoring it, Byrd could have pulled it out by decision.

 

"taking the fight on less than 2 weeks notice"

Wasn't this true for Byrd also. It is like a team complaining about the weather if they lose, but it was the same weather for both teams.

"inexperience"

Tells us a great deal about the competitive level. It is interesting that later fighters have often been able to take Vitali deep into a fight quite often.

Thanks for the tip on Larry Donald. That fight is on youtube and I'll watch it as soon as I have time.

 

So the world champion finds it a big problem to be matched with a fighter who can slip, duck, block, and roll with punches.

Apparently this hadn't happened before?

I'm tearing up for poor Vitali.

"What other manager/promoter doesn't go after an easy to hit plodder instead of a trickster southpaw?"

I thought the idea of being the champion was to be matched with the best, including tricksters.

But then I guess I'm just very old and very old school.

 

I think Klitschko's size, strength to go along with his activity would be too much for all three of these guys... Jones, Young and Spinks were all small and not very strong heavies, Ali and Holmes had a strength and size advantage over them but not nearly the size and strength advantage Klitschko would have. I feel it would be too much to go along with Klitschko's skills. I think he stops all of them in the early to mid rounds. Now against say Holmes or Ali, Klitschko would have a size and strength advantage but not to the same degree he had over the three mentioned I'd favor both Holmes and Ali in their primes to beat Klitschko though there are no sure things when you match up fighters of their quality from different eras.

 

Boxing has long since turned into the art of cherry picking. Managers pick the route of least resistence for their guy. For decades. Going from a 37 year old ruddock to a young southpaw in Byrd is as wide as it gets.

Other managers don't sign the fight. The fight we get instead is a face first easy to hit heavy. Like an Alex Stewart type guy. Not a guy the champ has to solve. Heavies that have to be solved require long training periods, even if they can manage to get a big fight. Short notice? Look for the face firsts.

 

I came across an interview Byrd gave to Ryan Songalia in 2011,

in which Byrd claims he sought a rematch with Vitali but was shifted to Wlad,

here is the quote,

"If I lost to a guy, and got criticized and thought I was winning easy, I would want a rematch. I asked for one, but they wanted me to fight Wladimir instead."

Interesting.

 

Here is the problem I have with the arguments mounted for Vitally Klitschko.

They hang very heavily on what people suppose he could have done.