Wladimir Klitschko has a very good resume..where does it rate in history

1. You are correct. As far as accomplishment goes, Vitali doesn't cut it.

2. Skilled--watching him against Williams, you certainly have a point. That low gaurd bothers me, but his opponents seem helpless against him. That says something about the opponents as well as about Vitali.

3. "Vitali's best assets are size, strength, and stamina"

And a good chin. These assets can carry one a very long way in heavyweight boxing. I don't really think that if Vitali were 6' 4" and about 210 he would have been much more than just another contender in the 1920 to 1960 era. He would have to bring up that low gaurd if fighting the 190 lbers with fast hands and improve his footwork against men who could move on their toes.

 

You guys are forgetting his reflexes. Vitali, in his prime, had possibly the best reflexes that I have seen in the heavyweight division since Ali. Those reflexes are his biggest attribute. That is what allowed him to bait his opponents in with his hands low, dip away from the punches and counter back.

 

Okay. Good point.

But those reflexes are exceptional against men who seem exceptionally slow on film. If he, like I imagined, were about 210 and fighting guys at the 180 to 200 lb level, I wonder. I would hate to have to rely on reflexes to avoid punches from Louis, Patterson, or Johansson.

 

At the same time, i can't help but imagine going back to the word helpless when i think of a 190lbs fighter going up against Vitali Klitschko, great handspeed or not. Louis is exceptional even for an exceptional fighter, but i think Patterson and Johansson would be smashed to a grinding TKO loss.

Also, Schmeling did pretty well in using reflexes to avoid punches from Louis. Not saying that because he did it (once), anyone could, but it's something to consider nonetheless.

 

Chris

On Vitali--I did say if he were scaled down to 210 or so lbs and proportionally shorter. He would be too big at 6' 8" and 250. At the smaller size I think he would have to develop a better defense to avoid the more quick-handed fighters he would face at the lighter weights.

on Schmeling--didn't work so well in the rematch, though. Louis just fought too cautiously the first go round, playing Schmeling's game.

 

1. You are all over the place. You initially stated that Valuev and Ruiz were missing from Wlad's legacy but with a win over their decisive conqueror and lineal WBA Champion there is question of significance to your complaint.

2. Wlad became recongized as the top Heavyweight by defeating Ring's #1 ranked and current IBF Champion Chris Byrd. Byrd held an "official" win over the retired Ring Champion Vitali and defeated Holyfield for Lewis' recently vacated IBF strap. This is hardly the same as Patterson/Moore, more like Liston/Patterson in the modern alphabet era. The Ring just wouldn't recognize him as their undisputed Champion until he unified against Sultan and the lineal WBA Champion and recognized #2 behind Vitali in Chageav.

 

Reasonable points--Actually, I don't think there is much reason to get excited about Ruiz. Valuev is important not so much because he is so good as that he is big and it would be interesting to see Wlad or Vitali go against someone who has huge physical advantages over them for a change.

As for Byrd--I don't see him so much as analogous to Moore vis-a-vis Patterson as to Hart. Hart had beaten Johnson, for all the controversy probably more impressively than Byrd "defeated" Vitali. Hart had not fought the retired Jeffries. Burns would have immensely more historical stature if he had beaten Jeffries rather than Hart. He would also have immensely more historical stature if he had beaten Johnson rather than Hart. So it is with Wlad versus Byrd. Wlad would get much greater credit for beating Lewis or Vitali than he gets for beating Byrd. I don't know if this is fair to Wlad, but that is the way I see it.

As for Holyfield--It depends when Wlad defeated him as he slipped more and more as the years went by. A victory around the year 2000 would have been important. Each year after that, less so. Byrd's victory over Holyfield is analogous to O'Brien's victory over Fitzsimmons. Burns doesn't get much in the way of historical stature for subsequently defeating O'Brien.

 

Fair enough on both counts. I tried to emphasize that Louis did destroy Schmeling in the rematch by saying "once" in my original statement.


By the way, and this goes back a few pages, i think that is one of the things to be noted when comparing Liston and Lewis' respective losses - Lewis embarrassed his conquerers in the rematches just as much as they embarrassed him the first time. Liston flopped even worse in his second chance with Ali and didn't avenge the Martin loss (though Martin retired i.i.r.c.), but he did beat Marshall twice.

If you don't mind me chipping in here:
I don't think it would prove much, because we've already seen him fight rated opponents his own size and he barely lost a round against the combined lot:
McCline, 6'6 260lbs, one sided hammering; the only thing that kept Jameel in the fight was his strong chin
Austin: 6'6 250lbs, knocked out with a quantriple left hook, didn't one use his right hand
Thompson: 6'5, 250lbs, managed to land some shots with his ackward style and excellent timing, but in the end was beaten down and knocked out with a single punch.

I remember that during every one of those, there were people saying "Wlad will lose because he's up against someone his own size now". What sets him apart is his technique, footspeed, handspeed, power, ring generalship and reflexes in addition to his size. With Valuev it will be the same story. Before the fight: "Valuev is a lot bigger which is new to him. Valuev by KO!". After the fight: "Well, Valuev had already lost to Chagaev and Haye, and Wlad is better than those so it was an easy win for him.".

 

Good points from Both Chris P. and Old Fogey.



I just want to comment on one thing regarding Valuev.. Post 2007, a win over the Russian Giant wouldn't have meant much for either Klitschko as he had already been bested by Ruslan Chagaev and was barely squeaking by ancient versions of Holyfield and Ruiz. Prior to this point however, it would have been a great legacy win for both men... Nikolay had reached 46-0, had some 5 title defenses and had the novelty of being boxing's largest man ever.. If Vitali had come out of retirement in 2007 to beat Valuev for the WBA title, it probably would have done more for him than beating Peter for the same belt in 2008.

 

I agree, especially if it was a decisive win.

 

This is the way I see it. Probably too late now although a Vitali-Valuev matchup still makes sense. Vitali is pretty long-in-the -tooth also. Valuev is clearly going back but Vitali might still be able to show what he can do against a much bigger man.

 

I think Valuev is not only bigger but a notch better than McCline, Austin, and Thompson. He would have been a nice scalp for either of the Klitschkos a few years back, especially if they could ko him.


One of the disheartening aspects of current boxing is how often good matches are not made. I understand the Vitali and Wlad situation, but why didn't either of them ever fight Valuev?