Will the fact that Wlad K never avenged his loss to Purity and Sanders hurt his legas

Certainly a bit as something or another hurts every champs' legacy. No legacy is perfect. Johnson never avenged his losses to Choynski or Hart, but we all agree he was a pretty special fighter and a top 10 heavy. Meanwhile, those who went undefeated, or relatively undefeated, such as Marciano or Jeffries, I tend to think their level competition hurts their legacy a bit. I know that not all would agree.

 

I don't think the Purrity loss is a big deal, he gassed out against a very rugged fighter and if he would have paced himself at all, i don't see him having problems. The lack of a Sanders rematch is a big deal and leaves question marks about his ability to deal with offensive powerhouses.

 

It would have been nice had he done it... but it shouldn't matter that he didn't.

I have no doubt that we all agree that he was better than Ross The Boss or even Corrie Sanders. For what it's worth his brother beat Puritty and Sanders by KO. Wlad beat Byrd twice (once by KO) who had beat Vitali by TKO.

It does matter that he lost to these guys... it also matters that he lost to Brewster even though he did avenge the loss. Avenging a loss doesn't erase the loss but it does show that a fighter can adapt. The bottom line is that avenging a loss definatley looks better but sometimes this can't happen for whatever reason. Sanders went on to fight Vitali and then didn't do much else. Had he fought Wlad right after losing to Vitali it would have meant something but things didn't work out that way.

Wlad hasn't lost in almost 9 years! During this time he is 17-0 (12) overall and 14-0 (10) in HW World Title Bouts. That's pretty good! Now consider that in these 17 fights he has avenged the loss to Brewster by KO and beat Peter twice. The rematch with Peter was important because Wlad was dropped 3 times in their first fight. Wlad won the rematch by KO. He also beat world champions Byrd (again), Ibragimov, Rahman, Chagaev, Haye, and Mormeck over the past 9 years.

 

a bit yeah because you can't say he beat everyone he faced in his physical prime.

The purrity loss isn't a big deal but by the time he faced sanders he was widely considered the second best HW in the world.

Other guys didn't avenge losses though like Tyson - Douglas etc.

Beating everyone you face is more of an amazing acheievement than a stick to beat someone with.

 

I think that most of the stellar greats of boxing avenged their losses. It has always been rather obvious to me that when a rematch isn't sought after that it's a kind of unspoken way of saying "I'll never be able to beat that guy" or in other words, "what's the use"?

 

Although the Purrity loss hurts his legacy the least I still think its inexplicable that he didn't pursue a rematch. He should have been able to outclass Purrity in the return. It would have reversed the defeat, it would have answered questions, and it probably would have been a routine win given the disparity in talent. Why not pursue that option? Who knows?

As for Sanders, it would have made a huge statement if he could have beaten Sanders while Sanders was still relevant.

I don't think that not rematching those two actively harms Wlad's legacy a great deal, but it does hurt his legacy in a roundabout way in that he passed up a chance to score two important victories, one of which could have been his defining victory.

 

Exactly how I see it :good

 

Yes, of course it will. Saying anything else is nonsense.

Unavenged losses when in one's prime, or close to it, will always hurt one's legacy.

 

You have to ask whether the timeline would have alowed him to rematch a version of these fighters worth rematching.

I think that in Sanders case it was getting to the point where rematching him wouldn't realy have proved anything.

 

People underestimate the fact that there is 2 Klitschko brothers. If Big Brother wasn't around to clean up his mess...

When Foreman lost to Ali,he didnt have a brother to come around and fight Ali for him.

 

Sanders chose the more lucrative unification fight with vitali. A fight after then would have been worth something to wlad but not really sanders.

Not wlads fault really but of course the win would help his legacy.

 

True Tyson didnt avenge his loss to Douglas but he had already been the undisputed champion.

 

Sometimes it's just careers moving in opposite directions. Again, I take the example of Jack Johnson and Choynski and Hart.

I think far,far worse is ducking your two best contenders for your entire reign. Actually it's inexcusable.

 

As already said yes a bit