Vitali is the best? hits harder than foreman and lennox?

Just saw LL v Briggs last 2 rounds. and LL seemed like he couldnt miss Briggs face. Didnt Briggs learn the basic slip moves.? But Briggs wasnt neccesarily better against LL. He might have trained harder for Vitali.

vitali doubled briggs' purse from 5 dollars to 10 dollars just for saying that LOL i thought something like that. Not in a literal sense but if Briggs doesn't retire he will be allowed to be in a future K2 undercard.

vitali doubled briggs' purse from 5 dollars to 10 dollars just for saying that

Foreman hits harder than both lewis and VK,we know this.We also know that vitali isnt as good as lennox lewis,remember briggs was saying these things after taking lots of hard shots to the head

briggs was 220ish then hes a 260+monster now..id say he can take more punishment now briggs was more gassed against lewis because he went guns a blazing in the first round making himself an easier kayo victim. anyway,,,vit doesnt hit as hard as he used to. he is 39 yrs old ya know

Not really. Holmes went on to fight at the highest competitive level of boxing for another ten years, beating Mercer, and being taken the distance with both prime Holyfield and prime McCall never being stopped or knocked down again since then. Sure, he wasn't as fresh against Tyson as against Shavers but I think the whole "Holmes was a shot old man" stuff really gets overblown to discredit Tyson and big up Shavers. Never said that, I just said Holmes wasn't in his prime against Tyson. While against Shavers he was. Just cuz you not in your prime doesn't mean you're shot old man. It just means you not in your prime. I would also say that Holyfield, Mercer, and McCall didn't hit as hard as Tyson did. Nor did they hit as hard as Shavers either IMO. Yeah, yeah, course it's probable. But you're missing my point which is that a lot of fighters simply can't be trusted regarding what they say. So many people said that Foreman was the hardest hitter they faced that it almost became unfashionable to do so. It became a competition to see who could come up with the catchiest and most imaginative quote. Yet these were frequently fighters who were beaten worse shortly before or shortly after facing him. Were they telling the truth? Fair enough Yeah you're welcome to that opinion, but name me one knockout of Foreman's that was more devastating than the second Rahman fight. But, Rahman didn't really have an iron chin either. I think Foreman KO over a much better fighter in Michael Moorer could be argued that that one shot was just as devastating and considering the age much impressive. However, like Rahman, Moorer chin at HW wasn't granite. I would say this I never seen Lennox dominate with pure power against a great fighter like Foreman did against Joe Frazier. That was like 5 knockdowns in just 2 rounds against an undefeated legend.

You're free to question him, of course, but then where do you draw the line? Is every boxers' comments regarding the punching power of his opponents to be taken into question then if it doesn't square up to the reality? Holmes said Shavers was the hardest puncher he ever faced, yet Shavers never knocked him out. Tyson did. Holyfield said Foreman was the hardest puncher he ever faced, yet it was Bowe who stopped him and knocked him down. Truth is, someone who's getting punched hard in the head isn't in much of a position to judge anything let alone something so nuanced as the relative punch strength of one 250lb man with bricks in his fists vs another 250lb man with bricks in his fists. your absolutly right.

Right but punch resistance does go with age at times. Holmes was prime against Shavers. Now aganst Tyson not so much. Do you agree? Not really. Holmes went on to fight at the highest competitive level of boxing for another ten years, beating Mercer, and being taken the distance with both prime Holyfield and prime McCall never being stopped or knocked down again since then. Sure, he wasn't as fresh against Tyson as against Shavers but I think the whole "Holmes was a shot old man" stuff really gets overblown to discredit Tyson and big up Shavers. And, Foreman was still 40+ year old when he fought Holyfield. Again is it POSSIBLE that could have been something to do with not KO'ing Holy? And, the reason why Bowe dropped dropped Holy is cuz he was more active than the old man? And, it was the third fight of a grueling trilogy? Could that be probable? Yeah, yeah, course it's probable. But you're missing my point which is that a lot of fighters simply can't be trusted regarding what they say. So many people said that Foreman was the hardest hitter they faced that it almost became unfashionable to do so. It became a competition to see who could come up with the catchiest and most imaginative quote. Yet these were frequently fighters who were beaten worse shortly before or shortly after facing him. Were they telling the truth? Just my opinion but I would not hesitate to declare Foreman a harder puncher than Lennox Lewis. Yeah you're welcome to that opinion, but name me one knockout of Foreman's that was more devastating than the second Rahman fight.

Vitali is obviously the greatest. Shannon Briggs is a truthful warrior, he ain't gonna lie about this ****.

You're free to question him, of course, but then where do you draw the line? Is every boxers' comments regarding the punching power of his opponents to be taken into question then if it doesn't square up to the reality? Holmes said Shavers was the hardest puncher he ever faced, yet Shavers never knocked him out. Tyson did. Holyfield said Foreman was the hardest puncher he ever faced, yet it was Bowe who stopped him and knocked him down. Truth is, someone who's getting punched hard in the head isn't in much of a position to judge anything let alone something so nuanced as the relative punch strength of one 250lb man with bricks in his fists vs another 250lb man with bricks in his fists. Right but punch resistance does go with age at times. Holmes was prime against Shavers. Now aganst Tyson not so much. Do you agree? And, Foreman was still 40+ year old when he fought Holyfield. Again is it POSSIBLE that could have been something to do with not KO'ing Holy? And, the reason why Bowe dropped dropped Holy is cuz he was more active than the old man? And, it was the third fight of a grueling trilogy? Could that be probable? Just my opinion but I would not hesitate to declare Foreman a harder puncher than Lennox Lewis.

Is it possible that Foreman being damn near 49 years old had anything to do with it? Of course it does, but both Holyfield and Briggs (prior to the Vit fight) said that he hit harder than Lewis. This clearly doesn't square with the reality of their fights, hence they were both talking monumental shit and by association call into question the veracity of any fighters' post fight comments.

im not taking away todays fight im jsut questioning his post fight comments You're free to question him, of course, but then where do you draw the line? Is every boxers' comments regarding the punching power of his opponents to be taken into question then if it doesn't square up to the reality? Holmes said Shavers was the hardest puncher he ever faced, yet Shavers never knocked him out. Tyson did. Holyfield said Foreman was the hardest puncher he ever faced, yet it was Bowe who stopped him and knocked him down. Truth is, someone who's getting punched hard in the head isn't in much of a position to judge anything let alone something so nuanced as the relative punch strength of one 250lb man with bricks in his fists vs another 250lb man with bricks in his fists.

So why did Lewis knock Briggs out but Foreman didn't? Is it possible that Foreman being damn near 49 years old had anything to do with it?

Foreman is the one hardest hitters in boxing history, you dont what y'all chatting about. So why did Lewis knock Briggs out but Foreman didn't?

3 other posters have asked him this same question and he has not answered it. Maybe because, he can't. He don't know how I was hating with that post. He just talking out of his ass like he normally does. He made a topic about it... Anyway, I didn't see it as hate. I didn't even get to the other pages to see what anyone else wrote.

How is what he said hate?... 3 other posters have asked him this same question and he has not answered it. Maybe because, he can't. He don't know how I was hating with that post. He just talking out of his ass like he normally does.

you're a hater..thought we already covered this How is what he said hate?...

It's much easier to hit hard when your opponent is too slow to throw anything back.

Klits = hype , they have fought nobody with a pulse , this is the worst HW era in history , god dam a Joe Frazier tonight takes Briggs to heaven in 2 rounds , its pathetic to think these are anything special compared to the true great HWs , some of you need to watch a lot more boxing for a lot longer than you have because all you can see is one clown that cant get out of his own way and a big fake that looks amatuer and cant take out a washed up bum .

Vitali is not even in the same category as Foreman, maybe Lennox though the Klitchko's are dominated the worse ERA in Heavyweight Boxing History just like Lennox was Dominated a Horrible ERA in Heavyweight Boxing History, are they ATG's??? maybe but they won't be listed very high on many ATG's Rankings because of their level of competition