Wake up: V. Klit is a solid top-10 ATG!

dude reminds me of a boxing Semmy Schilt

 

No, you keep screaming "Bull****!" and I keep trying to clarify my stance to illustrate what I actually mean.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think you're a moron or anything. But confidence is a big part of boxing. Sometimes a fighter's confidence is dented when they are confronted with something they haven't seen before and don't quite know how to react to.

Don't use quotes unless you're quoting what I have actually said.

I said that SOME fighters MAY be intimidated TO SOME DEGREE by a fighter who is HUGE. Who comes from a military family in one of the toughest parts of the world. Who can speak to them in a language they don't understand. Who is entirely different physically, stylistically and culturally than any opponent than any they have seen before. It's always less comfortable to deal with the known rather than the unknown.

And on that point, how will these ATGs fare against Vitali in Europe? Many of them never travelled overseas full stop. How much effect does 60,000 German fans cheering every punch Vitali throws have on them?

Right, except it did, because Foreman failed to knock Ali out early, and once that happened, he never looked like winning. The crowd being almost 100% pro-Ali surely had an effect on him, and it really looks like Foreman bowed to Ali very early in the fight, after the first couple of rounds he was trudging forward, throwing at the body, knowing that he was playing into Ali's hands but unable to do anything to stop it.

Do you doubt that he would have fought Wlad by now if they were not brothers? He is in a situation unique in boxing history. Additionally, he is by all appearances very keen to fight Haye or Valuev, except neither guy wants anything to do with him.

Right, but it's not about this one fight by itself, is it. And the Sosnowski who showed up on the weekend beats more than a couple of 38 year old ATGs, by the way.

Right, like:

Resume. (Vitali fails)
Physical stature. (Vitali epic win)
Power.
Speed.
Effective skill.
Chin.
Toughness.
Work Ethic.
Willingness to fight anyone.
Calm in the ring.
etc etc etc.

Vitali has a weak resume. He quit when he suffered a potentially career-ending injury that required major shoulder surgery. He got horrifically cut against Lennox. And that is pretty much all the negatives there are against him.

Meanwhile, he is an opponent the likes of which no ATG aside from fellow giant Lennox has ever seen. He is more than half a foot taller and fifty pounds heavier than some ATGs, and there is no fat on him. I think it's very realistic to suggest that head to head, he may well be top five. He's a physical and stylistic problem that is completely unprecedented in heavyweight history.

:hat

 

Not sure mate, by all accounts he was the #2 behind Wlad, I am not sure whether Vitali was ranked before the fight and therefore whether he edged ahead of Peter or not.

Also, I think Williams was very brieftly ranked in the top 10 after the Tyson win because Tyson was still ranked himself. Kirk Johnson may have held onto his top 10 ranking aswell.

Still, by all accounts the quality of his resumé is still very poor whether these guys are top 10 or not. The likes of Mahone, Sullivan, Norris, Purritty and Bean etc were nowhere near.

 

people ***** about the klitschkos being boring. which is understandable. But they are the only thing keeping the HW divisions pulse beating right now. Enjoy it while it lasts.

 

Why on earth would you rank on specific intangibles like that? That is terrible criteria if that is what you are using. So Vitali earns brownie points for being 6'7½ and having a good chin? If you are ranking H2H than fair enough, but combine all those factors and match up H2H with prime ATG's, I just don't think he does aswell as most claim.

 

Being ahead is what's even worse. It's a loss, Vitali knew that before he quit and that's how history will record it. He could of ran, hold, danced around for two rounds against a much, much smaller oponent who had no chance of beating him and won.

Holyfield on the other hand fought on for 11 hard rounds with the same injury. That is the sign of a true champion. What Vitali did was perform one of the worst quit-jobs ever seen in boxing.

 

Louis didn't let his brother avenge his loss for him. He did it himself in emphatic fashion.

 

Head to head is very important to me when ranking fighters. This whole time I haven't been talking about a who's greatest list. Not at all. Vitali doesn't crack the top 10 of that one. (Though his extremely successful comeback at age 36 with no warm-up fights gets him into the 10-20 conversation)

Head to head is an entirely different thing. And yes, Vitali gets a lot of points for being so tall and having an iron chin. Those two things right there make him extremely difficult to fight. But he brings much more than height and chin to the table.

Because his quality of opposition is so terrible, his record against them is very important. And Vitali is dominant to a ridiculous degree. Far more so than gold-plated ATGs were against the middling fighters they faced.

I guess one way to look at it is, when you put other ATGs in Vitali's career, how would they go? Would Joe Louis sweep the first nine rounds against Chris Byrd? Would George Foreman allow more than two guys to last the distance? Would a 38 year old Larry Holmes win every round against Chris Arreola? Would he stop him? Would Muhammed Ali lose more than a small handful of rounds against all of them combined? Would Lennox make it all the way through without ever being dropped?

Maybe some of these guys would do some of these things. Probably they would. But honestly, how many of them would do all of that, like Vitali did?

:hat

 

Credit to him for coming back, but still, look at the quality of opposition and the overall accomplishment. If we are comparing him to Foreman, Big George came-back at an even later age, when most are long retired and when even Vitali himself will be, and became unified champ. A greater accomplishment.

Now, if we look at quality of opposition, George did not really go the contender route as Vitali didn't by coming straight back into a title fight. He was very competitive with a prime heavyweight version of Evander Holyfield though. Vitali to his credit has fought top 10 contenders, but again they are not of great quality at all.

Obviously factoring into account there first careers there is no comparison. There is no reason why on this basis Vitali should be within 10-15 places of Foreman.

If you are ranking head-to-head then fine, it was the way you put 'resumé' and then a bunch of intangibles, like you were giving him individual credit for each one.

This cannot make up for his lack of a top heavyweight on his record though, no matter what you say. Even Joe Louis - who many claim fought poor opposition - has wins over 2 consensus top 20 ATG heavyweights in Schmeling and Walcott plus an even greater level of domination. It's one thing to dominate against poor oppostion well, it's another to consistently beat the best around when fighting 5-6 times a year.

Most guys have this great win though. Tyson doesn't, and it's one of the reason why I have him at #14. The only thing is, he single handedly cleaned out a division, beating the best available to him and unifying all the titles. He at least deserves credit for that, even if he lacks longevity or a major win. Vitali has neither cleaned out an era or beaten a great.

Styles. Not all of those you mentioned would fight in the same way. Louis doesn't have the luxury of Vitali's size, he might not sweep the first 9 rounds because Byrd would not have made it 9 rounds.

Would George Foreman allow more than 2 the distance? Probably not with that level of opposition. Would he allow Williams to get up off the canvas 5 times and make it half-way? Would he have hit Peter with all those punches and still not had him on the canvas? Doubtful.

How about this. Would Vitali have dominated Louis' level of opposition, fighting 5-6 times a year in same cases, making that many defences? Would Vitali have came back from enlisting in WWII to still dominate?

Would Vitali have racked up 21 title defences in Holmes era? Would he have edged Joe Frazier in a trilogy? Would you have beaten Foreman past his prime on foreign grounds?

I am not interested in how many rounds here or how many rounds there he's dropped against people like Herbie Hide or Vaughn Bean. There are marks of greatness that Vitali has failed to accomplish. He has not truly dominated an era, and yes he has had the opportunity to beat some good fighters. He has not beaten a great - and yes he did have the opportunity, even when that great was past his best and under-prepared.

 

Right, so it's 5am now, and insomniac as I am, I am probably not going to sleep before I have to get up, but I should at least close my eyes for a whole soon.

These men are professional fighters. Of course they aren't going to look at Vitali and say "oh no, look at him, I can't win, it's a victory for me to even get the courage to step in the ring."

But at the same time, it's foolish to say that intimidation has never affected heavyweight's performances in world title fights. Intimidation can take many forms. It doesn't have to mean you're scared of the person. It can mean that someone speaks to you in a language he knows you don't understand and then laughs, and you feel angry because he has demonstrated power over you, and that emotion takes you away from your gameplan and now that means he has intimidated you. That's what I mean.

Or maybe the simple act of looking up during the staredown, when you're used to looking down at your opponents. For the first time in your career, you realize you're the smaller man, and now you're not scared but your mind is unsettled, you're not in your usual groove, and that means you're intimidated. As for the cultural factor, what's the expression? Better the devil you know. Aren't you more comfortable around people who look like you and who are similar to people you've met before?

As I have said repeatedly, it's not the be-all and end-all. It's not the major factor. It's a very small wildcard mixed into a much larger whole.

Not just "from the Eastern bloc." A giant from the Eastern bloc, a larger man than any of them have faced in the ring before. Is any part of that statement not a fact?

COULD BE a SMALL advantage, against SOME fighters. In no way as important as his other attributes.

See, this is just what I meant. You are twisting my words. In no way, shape or form do I have "Joe Lous bottling the fight because Vitali speaks to him in German now." You make it sound like I'm saying "Anyone who can do a good Ivan Drago impression for Halloween will beat Joe Louis or George Foreman."

I have Joe Louis losing the fight because he is a little midget next to Vitali. The same way I have Mayweather losing to Chad Dawson.

No. But he dragged Foreman far enough out of his comfort zone that when it became apparent that things weren't going his way, Foreman collapsed. Foreman showed tremendous heart and fighting spirit against Lyle, but against Ali it wasn't there. You could see in the 3rd that he was getting discouraged, and at the end of the 5th it was a matter of time, he was done. Ali's self-confidence, charisma, constant stream of in-ring chatter and crowd support certainly contributed to this defeatest mindset.

As stated, Foreman gave up quite early. Sure it was really hot, sure he threw a lot of punches, but he was a 24 year old, undefeated champion and by the fifth round he had mentally checked out of the fight, a trait he never displayed before or after.

Yeah, yeah, I get it. I'll ask you one question. How do you think Vitali would have gone against Marciano's opposition? Would he have struggled against them, or smashed them? Which Marciano opponents would you see beating Vitali by points decision or stoppage?

:hat