The problem with not fighting the 2nd best fighter of your era:Klitschkos and others.

[Welter_Skelter]

Wlad has 3 belts.. Not many fighters today can say this. It might be none.
He could not have 3 belts if he wasn't fighting the best guys in his division.

I can give him and Vitali a pass for not fighting each other.. Don't any of you guys have brothers?

[techliam]

Beating the 2nd best usually doesn't do much, considering 2nd best is usually opinion.

For the RJJ situation, his legacy wasn't hurt much by not fighting him. He was a master at 154, unbeatable at 160 and 168 (noone head to head can be RJJ at 168 even today), at 175 he dominated (with the exception obviously), won a title at heavy, then regained the lineal title at 175. In the case of 175, it's not as if people viewed them as equals, he was just seen as the next guy who was seen as the best challenge to Jones. Noone would bet against RJJ in reality.

For the Klitschkos, it'd damage their personal image, something that means a lot to them both, especially Vitali, if they ever fought. In boxing terms, hmm I guess so. But Wlad and Vitali were never prime-for-prime. In an in-depth boxing analysis on that fight, thered always be doubts that one wasn't prime.

The Mayweather/Pacquiao fight situation is just embarrassing. Mayweather's legacy is more damaged from this, as it has been years since he has universally been ranked 1 P4P. Pacquiao will remain a star outside of boxing, a huge celebrity in the Philippines. I can't see what Mayweather will be outside of boxing.

But i'm sure it does devalue other legacys in some form or other. Its just these examples can be explained otherwise.

[IMDAZED]

Don't think the Klitschko's "shared an era." One didn't even fight for four years and was only considered the world's best HW for a grand total of a few months.

[Jel]

Originally Posted by techliam

Beating the 2nd best usually doesn't do much, considering 2nd best is usually opinion.

For the RJJ situation, his legacy wasn't hurt much by not fighting him. He was a master at 154, unbeatable at 160 and 168 (noone head to head can be RJJ at 168 even today), at 175 he dominated (with the exception obviously), won a title at heavy, then regained the lineal title at 175. In the case of 175, it's not as if people viewed them as equals, he was just seen as the next guy who was seen as the best challenge to Jones. Noone would bet against RJJ in reality.

For the Klitschkos, it'd damage their personal image, something that means a lot to them both, especially Vitali, if they ever fought. In boxing terms, hmm I guess so. But Wlad and Vitali were never prime-for-prime. In an in-depth boxing analysis on that fight, thered always be doubts that one wasn't prime.

The Mayweather/Pacquiao fight situation is just embarrassing. Mayweather's legacy is more damaged from this, as it has been years since he has universally been ranked 1 P4P. Pacquiao will remain a star outside of boxing, a huge celebrity in the Philippines. I can't see what Mayweather will be outside of boxing.

But i'm sure it does devalue other legacys in some form or other. Its just these examples can be explained otherwise.

I 100% agree with you, but I'm just pointing out Wlad will break some record defenses that he wouldn't have been able to break if he fought the #2... Because Vitali is actually favored to beat him prior to 2010.

[Jel]

Originally Posted by Welter_Skelter

Wlad has 3 belts.. Not many fighters today can say this. It might be none.
He could not have 3 belts if he wasn't fighting the best guys in his division.

I can give him and Vitali a pass for not fighting each other.. Don't any of you guys have brothers?

I agree. Nobody is talking about his belts. I'm not saying they should fight. I clarified this. I am saying that the # of defenses Wlad have is not legit because if he had fought Vitali (the #2) during his defense reign he probably would have lost, hence snapping the streak. This is vital because many boxing writers when asked about their claim for Wlad in the top 10 ATG HW ranking almost always brings up his longevity and # of consecutive defenses.

[IMDAZED]

Originally Posted by Jel

I 100% agree with you, but I'm just pointing out Wlad will break some record defenses that he wouldn't have been able to break if he fought the #2... Because Vitali is actually favored to beat him prior to 2010.

Doesn't mean Vitali would actually be able to do that. So you can't say Wlad wouldn't have been able to do that.

[Jel]

Originally Posted by IMDAZED

Doesn't mean Vitali would actually be able to do that. So you can't say Wlad wouldn't have been able to do that.

Ya, but he should rightfully be favored. The tag team issue is bothersome as well. Like I mentioned earlier, Wlad should be able to beat everyone Vitali beat and vice versa but we just don't know.

[IMDAZED]

Originally Posted by Jel

Ya, but he should rightfully be favored. The tag team issue is bothersome as well. Like I mentioned earlier, Wlad should be able to beat everyone Vitali beat and vice versa but we just don't know.

No, he shouldn't rightfully be favored. Even if he was. There was a time Diego Corrales was favored over Floyd Mayweather. Can't base this on ifs and maybes. One retired and the other took over and hasn't lost his grip on the top slot. Besides, the one that retired was #1 for a very, very short period.

[Jel]

Originally Posted by techliam

Beating the 2nd best usually doesn't do much, considering 2nd best is usually opinion.

For the RJJ situation, his legacy wasn't hurt much by not fighting him. He was a master at 154, unbeatable at 160 and 168 (noone head to head can be RJJ at 168 even today), at 175 he dominated (with the exception obviously), won a title at heavy, then regained the lineal title at 175. In the case of 175, it's not as if people viewed them as equals, he was just seen as the next guy who was seen as the best challenge to Jones. Noone would bet against RJJ in reality.

For the Klitschkos, it'd damage their personal image, something that means a lot to them both, especially Vitali, if they ever fought. In boxing terms, hmm I guess so. But Wlad and Vitali were never prime-for-prime. In an in-depth boxing analysis on that fight, thered always be doubts that one wasn't prime.

The Mayweather/Pacquiao fight situation is just embarrassing. Mayweather's legacy is more damaged from this, as it has been years since he has universally been ranked 1 P4P. Pacquiao will remain a star outside of boxing, a huge celebrity in the Philippines. I can't see what Mayweather will be outside of boxing.

But i'm sure it does devalue other legacys in some form or other. Its just these examples can be explained otherwise.

RJJ should rightfully be favored but I think a lot of you are seriously forgetting the number of MW and SMW talents back in the 90's. Julian Jackson, Gerald, Nigel, Eubank, Nunn, were all amazing talents. Just because RJJ dominated Toney at 168 don't mean he will dominate everyone he touched. Dariuz had a legit chance of being the toughest opponent RJJ ever fought prior to Calzaghe.

As for Vitali's personal image. You mean the guy who admitted to steroid usage? The same guy who told Wlad to 'quit like a coward' after his knock outs. The same guy who made fun of Wlad and Emmanuel after Brewster? Who said they were done? The same guy who stood over Solis when Solis injured his knee and yelled at him to stop faking?

That guy?

[Jel]

Originally Posted by IMDAZED

No, he shouldn't rightfully be favored. Even if he was. There was a time Diego Corrales was favored over Floyd Mayweather. Can't base this on ifs and maybes. One retired and the other took over and hasn't lost his grip on the top slot. Besides, the one that retired was #1 for a very, very short period.

But Vitali was #2 for pretty much Wlad's entire reign. Wait, so the ONLY reason they are excused is because they are brothers right?

Let's say Prime Lennox was in this era instead of the 90's to early 2000's. Say Prime Lennox is #1 and Wlad is #2 and they never fought. That will not be excusable right? Because you won't have known who really was the #1.