Vitali Klitschko vs George Foreman FULL FIGHT WRITE UP

For the longest time i had no idea you were an out and out troll so kudos on that part.

 

Norton was at best slightly past it vs Shavers. Immediately prior he gave Holmes a good fight. Throwing the fight out as totally irrelevant makes zero sense. If he was so shot how did he give Holmes trouble 2 fights prior. Nobody was saying he was totally done prior to the fight. It's not trolling to suggest Norton didn't do well against punchers because that's what the evidence objectively shows.

 

The Foreman jab was an awesome weapon. Although Vitali had a very good jab the Foreman jab here would disrupt mightily everything Vitali is trying to accomplish. It busts him up and creates a pathway for Foreman’s ko blows.

 

One thing I find kind of curious is that the same people who dismiss Vitali based on his resume criticize Wlad for not facing him and suggest that by not beating him he failed to prove himself the best of his era.
Using that logic how is Wlad not facing Vitali more damaging than Holmes missing out on Thomas
or Lewis missing Byrd, Bowe, and Ibeabuchi.
Or frankly even Wlad not fighting Ortiz and Wilder.
It seems like people want to dismiss him based on his resume in fantasy fights but somehow assume he was Wlad's main rival despite his underwhelming resume.

 

Well I’m not sure about the crowd but personally I dismiss Vitali because he was a completely junk fighter with almost no redeeming qualities. His rise is attributable largely to the state of the division.

 

And there it is..............."the state of the division". That's how easy the damn question is! Of course he was Wlads main rival because.....wait for it......"the state of the division!!!!!!".

 

Of course. What else could we attribute his profile to? His punching power? Handspeed? Vast skill set? Natural instincts & fluidity?

 

Realistically though there are other fighters from that era I would pick to beat everyone Vitali beat. I'd say at the very least Povetkin, Ortiz, Pulev, and Chagaev, maybe David Haye as well.
Some of these guys have better wins too at least in my opinion.

 

I think you can argue for that.

 

I’d be interested to see that needle thread.

 

From what I've seen of him, he had great fighting instincts, was a scrapper, could take a punch, never back down, seems like he enjoyed doing damage and even taking some shots. To me that's natural instinct for fighting.

 

Lewis didn't miss out on Ibeabuchi or Bowe.

Ibeabuchi went to prison before his career got started.

Bowe ducked Lewis and had a very short prime, and then Lewis had to deal with Golota who spanked Bowe around the ring twice.

As for Byrd well Lewis fought Tyson instead I mean obviously Lewis will fight Tyson who's a big money fight and a big name, which is much better win for his legacy regardless if Tyson was a past it. No one was really interested in Lewis fighting the very dull Chris Byrd, and Byrd's short title reign was one of the most lackluster reigns ever.......

Controversial decision vs Golota that many had Byrd losing.

Controversial decision vs Oquendo which many had Byrd losing.

Another disputed decision against McCline.

And the worst Heavyweight title fight in history vs Williamson which was scored a draw because no one landed a punch.

I think Lewis did just fine fighting Tyson instead which is a more standout name on his resume compared to Byrd.

 

It's always fascinating the kinds of arguments Coljimar comes up with throwing an established ATG boxer with excellent credentials under the bus to then hype up a guy whose either unproven or simply not that great.

Lewis turned over virtually every rock and had a hell of a pro career. Questioning his overall ability because he missed Bowe (a guy who threw his belt in the trash when they were supposed to fight and then let his career spiral out of control), Ruiz (an incredibly boring jab and grab machine), Byrd (a slippery, feather fisted defensive fighter who would rather step on a thumb tack than take a punch), and Ike (a talented, but mentally unstable bruiser with a thin resume who went to prison before he could manage to become a fully fledged contender).

Posters like him are more obsessed with the idea of an invincible h2h monster than looking at the actual facts, footage, and stats with the proper context. Discussing the "could have, should have, would have" regarding Vitali's career somehow makes him better than Lewis who earned his high status with hard work and actually winning.

 

You're right and I'm surprised people who hold that against Wlad exist. Wlad and Vitali are brothers and its really not reasonable to expect them to fight if they've expressed they don't want to. I thought thats a core reason why no one complained when the lineal belt transferred from Vitali to Wladimir despite Vitalis return. Its a rather unique situation.

 

The reason people hold it against the brothers is because the division went through long, boring periods where the two of them dominated vastly inferior opponents and we had no idea who THE best heavyweight in the world was. This was frustrating and made it hard to know which of the two bothers was the better champion, let alone their ATG rankings.

People were curious and wanted to see Wladmir fight his brother Vitali because Vitali was clearly the best of a bad era. For a long time, he was the only viable A level elite opponent who could've given Wladmir a much needed "signature win". It can both be true that Vitali was a good fighter for that era and that people would give Wladmir props for beating him.