Wilders title run v vitalis title run

The interesting thing about this thread is that it shows that most fighters get only one window to build a legacy.

Long after they fight their last fight ... the names on their win list define their status, not only in a historical context but also in relation to how they can build something outside of the ring from their past accomplishments.

Both Wilder and Vitali's legacies suffer from never going for unification.

All this is obvious ... but this thread sort of re-enforces this point IMO.

BTW ... Vitali beating Gomez is a good win. JC Gomez was pretty frustrating ... I just remember a lot of wasted time
through inactivity because of a lack a dedication. He's another who could have had a better legacy, from which he could
perhaps trade off of today. Props to the Ding-a-ling Man for his win over him.

 

Not a massive amount of difference quality-wise in those lists, I'd probably agree, but Vitali had 2 reigns as WBC Champion (and a spell as WBO champ) in addition.

Vitali lost to Lewis on cuts when ahead on points and never got a rematch though.
Wilder received a fortunate draw vs Fury 1st time in my opinion and got hammered in the rematch.

Vitali was more dominant in his second spell as WBC king compared to Wilder in his run, also imo, and came back from a four year layoff to dethrone Sam Peter.
Vitali has arguably been no.1 in the division. I don't think Deontay ever was.

Clear advantage Vitali to date.

 

It's close.

The first Ortiz win is probably better than anything on Vitali's resume. A jaded and out of shape Corrie Saunders...Vitali's best win?

Wilder gets a lot of flack for his defences, and rightfully so, but with Vitali - because he gave Lennox Lewis a tough fight - he has enjoyed this halo effect.

It was Wlad who defended against much better competition. You can't dine out on a nearly-achievement against a 37-year-old Lewis who was clearly aged. There are some pretty statistics on that 45-2 record but, ultimately, competition is king.

 

Lmao. What difference does that make?

 

Vitali's list reinforces my opinion of him,, overrated. What's his best Briggs? a guy that I thought lost to a 47 year old George Foreman ? One other thing these lists say,,,it's easy to build up a big winning record without being that good.

 

It's kind of equal. Maybe a slight nod to Wilder actually.

Stiverne wasn't bad when Wilder first beat him. Ortiz is decent if untested. Duhaupas is a solid B fighter that wouldn't look out of place on Vitali's resume.

 

Vitali still beat Sanders. A very awkward skilful HW. Better win than any of Wilders. So is the Peter win considering the run Peter was on at the time, Maskaev, Toney, McCline etc.. both wins came in his mid to late 30s too whereas Wilder has just been brutally stopped!

Vitali>Wilder.

 

Probably most.

 

You have got to be kidding? Ortiz had a standby in case he had a stroke for that fight, his age is highly questionable & he'd fought two rounds in the space of 15 months leading up to that fight, he's never won a title & nor has he got a win as good as a young Wlad (especially the manner of it!) who was on his 5th defense of his WBO belt. His best win is either Jennings or a 45 yr old Tony Thompson. Don't tell me Sanders was DONE when he fought Vitali either, he'd just gotten his career best win prior to it and his performance against Vitali aswell showed he was far from done! Yes criticisms can be levelled at the Sanders win too, he was late 30s, but so was Vitali when he was beating Peter or Wlad when he sparked Pulev.. doesn't necessarily mean you're shot! I mean I thought Povetkin was up until the other day! & Sanders 'shape'.. he was never the body beautiful and always fluctuated in weight some what

BTW, Wilder was losing that fight too whereas Vitali was clearly ahead when the stoppage came & well up on the cards. Sanders win is better, Ortiz is a decent fighter but he's yet to have a stand out moment in his career.

 

They would likely beat Molina, shot Arreola and Szpilka. Some would beat Washington and Stiverne (rematch)

 

& big vit absolutely toyed with & destroyed a younger undefeated Arreola.. Wilder fought an ancient version & it still looked less impressive than Vitalis win.. so this idea that Wilders opposition is better is a nonsense.. Wilder couldn't even look as good as Vitali fighting his shot leftovers..

 

Why do guys overrate Ortiz as if he was some accomplished monster in his division?!? It's amazing how highly rated he is for losing to DW...

 

Where Wladimir benefited from boxing throughout a poor era, I think that Vitali suffered as he wasn't able to compete in the big fights he would no doubt have relished (although he was never the same after his 2008 comeback).

Vitali's is stronger because of the manner in which he dominated opposition. The names are much of a muchness.

 

Not saying you're being completely biased or anything but is there a reason that you have Arreola on Wilder's list but not the undefeated (at the time) Arreola on Vitali's list?

Also, Briggs, Adamek and Peter I'd favor over anyone on Wilder's list (Fury excluded)

Kirk Johnson as well (even though he was also oddly left out)