You guys are going round in circles arguing about form rather than substance imho. I'll state my position clearly: Vitali > Byrd and Povetkin if I had to pick them in a fight. Resumes ... yeah, you can argue about that.
This was the quote and context is important. This was a contrast of Vitali/Lewis vs Wlad/Byrd I and Wlad/Povetkin as marquee wins..not all time great HW ratings. "I would argue Byrd and Povetkin as "marquee wins" but I won't argue them as all time great heavyweights if that's what you would expect me to do to defend that stance. I rate both these men over or on the level of Vitali Klitschko and he's considered to be a "marquee win" for Lennox Lewis." I understand the wording there is a little confusing and you asked for clarification, which i GAVE! Good ****ing grief.
Why don't we list the top ten or so wins for each fighter and stack them up? That should tell us something.
No marquee win. Not having avenged all his defeats. Not having faced his number 1 competitive rival for four years straight. And I haven't even started on the resume. So there's plenty of basis to exclude him.
He's been an institution at the very top for over a decade. Ducked nobody. Has one of the best resumes around
Vit top 10 ish wins Peter Sanders Adamek Johnson Hide Arreola Gomez Solis Donald( most completely dominated) Top 25ish Charr Briggs Sosnowski Johnson Williams Purrity Bean Losses: Fluky loss to Byrd that still showed him as the better fighter Loss on cuts to Lewis in an ATG fight that created one of the great debates in boxing history Byrd top 10 ish wins Shot Holyfield Tua Fluky Vit win McCline Top 25ish Williamson Oquendo Harris Draw to Golata Purrity Castillo Losses Wlad (2) Ike Pov Draw with Golata None really even that close Sasha top 10ish Takam Chagaev Chambers Shot Byrd (most close fights) Top 25ish wins Duhaupas (roids) Wach Perez Charr Huck(controversial) Estrada Donald Losses: Wiped out by Wlad Sasha comes closer in raw wins than Byrd, but he got wiped out against the best, and unlike Vitali struggled in many of his wins. It's really apples and oranges. Cobras type of revisionism could be applied in many different places. You can make a similar argument that Norton is better than Frazier on resume. They both got a win over Ali, and you could strain to argue Norton's comp was better. But it ignores the broader context, and is fundamentally intellectually bankrupt argument.
In other words, you are backtracking. Either way, if you are abandoning your position that they are above Vit, having them on the same level is "on a level" with that for it's stupidity
Cobra trolling his way out of a corner again and restoring to tedious platitudes he seems to think make him some sort of winner. The guy is a pure joke Andrew and ManMachine get on hassle -free with the rest of the forum. MongGoose you're incompatible with real people , go and get perma booted again.
I don't dispute his longevity He did. His number 1 competitive rival - for four years. (There were understandable reasons but that doesn't change the fact that this happened) Debatable. He has no marquee win and, for whatever reason, he failed to rematch Sanders, who handed him his most unflattering defeat.
Clear, but bad. Sanders and Peter are arguably "at the level" of Saha and Byrd. There is more of an argument there than there is to compare them to Vit. In fact, I think that will be my next post.