Why did Vits not fight these top 10 fighters?

I thought he meant 11 years minus the 4 years due to injury. Nothing to see here, carry on.

 

That's actually a surprisingly thoughtful statement. I obviously disagree generally, but I do think he could have done a better job at times. My biggest problem with VK's resume is not having a top victory over someone close to his size on there. There is a defensible argument that his style of fighting is less well suited to fighting extremely tall, reachy fighters. While there are almost no top fighters his size out there during the time he had some freedom to choose opponents (i.e. post Sam Peter), he should have done what Wlad did with Haye and acquiesce to the absurd price demands of Valuev in order to fight him for legacy. I would rank him above LL if all else was the same and he got a ko victory over Valuev, while currently I rank him below LL. Dimitrenko was really the only other option out there during that time frame, but Dimitrenko was another example of an artificial Ring top 10, VK would have been criticized for fighting a bum. Still he should have taken that match instead of Sosnowski.

 

On the subject I did a similar thing among all the active HW's against the ring top 10's awhile ago.

Current HW's against The Ring top 10 HW's
Just how many have they managed to scalp that were either in The Ring's top 10 during the fight or managed to get in afterwards.

1. W. Klitschko. Scalped 14. Peter x 2, Chagaev, Chambers, Haye, Brewster, Thompson x 2, Byrd x 2 Ibragimov, Barrett, Brock, McCline
2. V. Klitschko. Scalped 6. Peter, Adamek, Sanders, Arreola, Juan Carlos Gomez, Kirk Johnson
3. Peter. Scalped 3. Maskaev, James Toney x 2
4. Chagaev. Scalped 3. Valuev, Ruiz and Vyrchys.
5. Rahman Scalped 3 Lewis, Barrett, Sanders
6. Adamek. Scalped 2. Chambers, Arreola
7. Povetkin. Scalped 2. Chambers and Chagaev.
8. Chambers. Scalped 2. Dimitrenko, Peter
9. Pulev. Sclaped 1. Dimitrenko,
10. Haye. Scalped 1. Valuev.
11. Stiverne. Scalped 1. Arreola

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=423986&highlight=hide

 

Why do you have Dimetrenko ,Boystov and Pulev on your list?? There not top 10 fighters.

 

How can you ask that when you know Lewis comes from a tougher era.
Lewis would have greater numbers if he fought in a lesser era. It's common sense. I didn't know I needed to teach you this.

 

That research is **** poor. Its fkin double counting for one and you included people for wlad that others faced and yet the didnt get counted e.g barrett.

 

You can certainly make a rational argument that WK is the greater brother, but don't say that those numbers prove it. As I've said before, Ring is a poor indicator of true worthiness as a contender, and in my own analysis, Vitali has beaten 9 top 10 HW's and 19 top 20 HW's and WK has beaten 15 and 27, respectively. So, still a sizable gap, but not as huge as per Ring. Meanwhile if you break it down further, VK decisively beat two boxers who were regarded almost unequivocally as the best non K heavyweights at the time, Corrie Sanders and Sam Peter. His brother was knocked out or repeatedly knocked down by each. Moreover, the closest WK has come to beating the top non K HW of the time were Ibragimov, Chagaev, Byrd and Haye, and none of those fighters were nearly so feared or respected as Sanders or Peter. VK's two losses were by injury in fights he was largely dominant in, and while two of WK's losses were due to gassing or some kind of bizarre health condition, the Sanders loss was flat out domination. Finally, while WK has the stronger single punch, VK's ko percentage is higher, and VK wins more rounds and is generally more dominant in fights than WK. For those reasons, VK has the greater overall legacy. If we're just talking about raw numbers of wins over top guys, Larry Holmes is in the top 3 all time if not higher. But he won a lot of close fights, and I don't think many people would put him higher than the #8 that I give him. Clearly a lot more should go into an honest evaluation than just number of wins.

 

Well you didn't bother to read the criteria then did you? Otherwise I would have to be putting down Rahman as win for Wlad and Briggs as one for Vitali etc.....
The point of the list is to see who fought who when the opponent actually meant something. "Top 10 at the time of the fight or got into it afterwards."

 

Thanks, glad to debate with you. It helps me sharpen my own opinions, hopefully you can say the same.