Is Vitali Klitschko an all-time top-ten heavyweight?

[Dr. Z]

With all due respect, your criteria was Ring ranked fighters. I don't have Dempsey in my top ten either which many think is sacrilege. But I'll bet every one of those fighter beat more Top 10 Ring rated fighter than Vits. What's more. I would probably also bet there opponents top 10 records are deeper and more accomplished. Of course this is just a guess at this point, but one I'd be willing to gamble on. Vits was a tough cat, no doubt. But his ledger just doesn't support a top 10 spot by any means. But lists are subjective, so who am I to say??

No, these 10 legends did not all beat more ring rated opponents. In several cases to be honest! You aren't aware of this ( obvisouly ) but I did mention it in the article.

This article matches them in facts and has the same standards. I did not write the article to nit pick at anyone. Ivich's intention is to due that.

[JAB5239]

No, these 10 legends did not all beat more ring rated opponents. In several cases to be honest! You aren't aware of this ( obvisouly ) but I did mention it in the article.

This article matches them in facts and has the same standards. I did not write the article to nit pick at anyone. Ivich's intention is to due that.

This was the last top 10 I did. Looking beck it's certainly not infallible, but we can start here. Louis and Ali you need not bother. We allk ow their greatness and why. The numbers would be seriously skewered In their favor. But let's break down the rest by top 10 fighters fought, top 10 wins, whether they were lineal and who their opponents beat. This is in my opinion the best way to come to the conclusion of top ten greatness. Johnson is difficult as there were no rankings when he fought.

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Holmes
4. Foreman
5. Lewis
6. Holyfield
7. Tyson
8. Wlad
9. Liston
10. Frazier

[Ivich]

This was the last top 10 I did. Looking beck it's certainly not infallible, but we can start here. Louis and Ali you need not bother. We allk ow their greatness and why. The numbers would be seriously skewered In their favor. But let's break down the rest by top 10 fighters fought, top 10 wins, whether they were lineal and who their opponents beat. This is in my opinion the best way to come to the conclusion of top ten greatness. Johnson is difficult as there were no rankings when he fought.

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Holmes
4. Foreman
5. Lewis
6. Holyfield
7. Tyson
8. Wlad
9. Liston
10. Frazier

Pretty good list, I would have 8 of those in mine.

[QueensburyRules]

Fighters such as Dempsey, Louis, Marciano, Liston, Ali, Frazier, Holmes, Tyson, Hoyfleid, Bowe, Lewis, and W Kiltsckho..

What is record vs top men? Legends.


Dempsey sort of has none right? Sharkey is a top win with Dempsey low blow and left hook combo.

Louis should be 4-5 vs the top men he fought in Schemling, Conn, Walcott , Marciano and Charles. But he is 5-4 and can thank his lucky stars the Conn match was only 12 rounds and there was no s 10 point must system for the Walcott fight.

Liston but 2-2 in his biggest matches.

Frazier is but 1-4

Tyson did not win any big fights, he lost them badly.

Holyfield beat Tyson, but is 1-3-1 in his other biggest fights.

Point being even the legends are easy to nit pick at, which was your goal. Vitali's losses we not because of ring ability. They were due to a shoulder injury and cuts. Ali himself once lost an amateur match on cuts. Point being injuries and cuts happen can happen to anyone in boxing.

- - Cleared out the stink of Tubby Lar and DKing WBA pawns that earned him by age 23 the most belts in hvywt history along with the most career earnings by a long shot. No Hvy save Joe Louis did more to clean up boxing and no fighter save Dempsey made boxing such a spectacle must see sport.

By Tyson time Ring was just another bankrupt boxing journal, but most of the fighters he was beating were Ring ranked no matter how poor you say they was.

[Willow The Wisp]

I like the thought put into this, to quantify supportive data and making a favored case here. I don't need or desire a segue into the nature and method of data compilation. Your work goes a long way in pointing out what many may have missed using the Ring's ratings, and that's the extent of what you're reaching for. I say that your mission has been accomplished. It goes without saying that there are other elements that cannot be set aside in formulating answers to an all-time ratings undertaking, a point to which you'll agree, but I for one like your thread and many of your posts; here hoping any debate that may transpire will make good use of allot of salient points and less use of pissing contest language in their texture. But, it's also important to always guard against the creep of historical corruption to any scholar so I've got to respectfully slip in here a mention that Vitali (and McCall) are not part of the linial Heavyweight Championship of the world and the sentence containing "Vitali and Oliver Mcall are the only two in the history of the lineal champions..." requires an asterisk. Those two where merely "World Championship title claimants", a misleading tradition which dates to Jake Kilrain and Peter Maher in the modern era and includes many exceptional contenders like Vitali.
I embrace the meaning behind your statistics regarding the elder Klitschko, and I rate him very, very highly myself. Nobody’s methodology can fully debar strains of subjectivity. Even the authors of The Ring's long respected world ratings, many of whom I have known and swapped notes with going all the way back to the unfortunately abashed Johnny Ort, (a smart guy who made one ****** mistake), and I can personally witness that they too are bound to subjectivity. That's life.
Assuming that all the criteria points that fold into my personal lists, a "bragging" preface is that lofty claims, name dropping and crafted language do not a boxing expert make. But I trust what things that I've seen.
I have seen many of these gut fight live, an I rank Vitali thusly:

I'll cut the modern era roughly in half. 1962 - 2022, and Begin with Liston.
Though Ingemar fought slightly into the 60's and Floyd stayed ranked in most circles into 72', I'll keep them (and Williams, Moore, Machen, Folley and others), back in the first half.

The 50 Best* Heavyweights of the last 60 Years:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. George Foreman
3. Larry Holmes
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Sonny Liston
6. Mike Tyson
7. Joe Frazier
8. Wladamir Klitschko
9. Tyson Fury (Active)
10. Evander Holyfield
11. Vitali Klitschko
12. Deontay Wilder (Active)
13. Ken Norton
14. Rid**** Bowe
15. Anthony Joshua (Active)
16. Jerry Quarry
17. Ron Lyle
18. Jimmy Ellis
19. Oleksandr Usyk (Active)
20. Jimmy Young
21. Andy Ruiz Jr. (Active)
22. Tim Witherspoon
23. George Chuvalo
24. Earnie Shavers
25. Frank Bruno
26. Ernie Terrell
27. Joe Bugner
28. Mike Weaver
29. Joe Joyce (Active)
30. Ike Ibeabuchi
31. Michael Dokes
32. David Tua
33. Alexander Povetkin
34. Gerry Cooney
35. Dillian Whyte. (Active)
36. Tony Tucker
37. Razor Ruddock
38. Joseph Parker. (Active)
39. Oliver McCall
37. Andrew Golota
38. Ray Mercer
39. Tommy Morrison
40. Gerrie Coetzee
41. James Buster Douglas
42. Michael Spinks
43. Shannon Briggs
44. Luis Ortiz (Active)
45. Michael Moorer
46. Bonecrusher Smith
47. Trevor Berbick
48. Chris Byrd
49. Hasim Rahman
50. David Haye

[markusmod]

Vitali was a good fighter, but injuries and a multi-year retirement affected his career's worth

[Dr. Z]

This was the last top 10 I did. Looking beck it's certainly not infallible, but we can start here. Louis and Ali you need not bother. We allk ow their greatness and why. The numbers would be seriously skewered In their favor. But let's break down the rest by top 10 fighters fought, top 10 wins, whether they were lineal and who their opponents beat. This is in my opinion the best way to come to the conclusion of top ten greatness. Johnson is difficult as there were no rankings when he fought.

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Holmes
4. Foreman
5. Lewis
6. Holyfield
7. Tyson
8. Wlad
9. Liston
10. Frazier

If the question was is he top 15 in ring accomplishments the answer is certainly. Are you with me here? Top 12 you could make room for him. But the question is he top 10?

You choose the group I compare him agaist historically. That's good. But get the felling you are biased against him for his two losses, which if compared to the other champions defeats are much better. You admit he would have won re-match vs Byrd. I say he would have too. I'm 90% sure he would have. Is his loss that bad? Is to loss to Lewis a top 5 heavyweight in you opinion that bad? If you look at you list everyone on it has worse defeats. Everyone. Some are early KO losses, lopsided defeats on the score cards, or losses to no top ten men ranked much lower by ring magazine standards. At least you not against most of the points made in the artcile.

And we aren't talking head to head ratings. I would rate Vitali higher in this format. Others have said they would too.

[JAB5239]

If the question was is he top 15 in ring accomplishments the answer is certainly. Are you with me here? Top 12 you could make room for him. But the question is he top 10?

I'm sorry, but I would still disagree. He never cleaned out his division, never beat a top fighter or the best fighter in his division and has a weak resume in my opinion. Head to head I'd rank him top 15 if not higher. But I don't base my personal rankings on who I feel may win in fantasy fights but rather who they beat, when they beat them and how that competition fared before and after said fights.

You mentioned some guys with early KO losses. But are you taking the time period into consideration and the amount of experience they had? What about possible dives that were probably more prevalent in earlier eras? I'm just saying there is more to consider than just an early KO loss.

This is totally subjective either way. I like Vits and think he's a great man. But it is my opinion his career is overrated and his brother did all the heavy lifting in that era.

[Dr. Z]

I'm sorry, but I would still disagree. He never cleaned out his division, never beat a top fighter or the best fighter in his division and has a weak resume in my opinion. Head to head I'd rank him top 15 if not higher. But I don't base my personal rankings on who I feel may win in fantasy fights but rather who they beat, when they beat them and how that competition fared before and after said fights.

You mentioned some guys with early KO losses. But are you taking the time period into consideration and the amount of experience they had? What about possible dives that were probably more prevalent in earlier eras? I'm just saying there is more to consider than just an early KO loss.

This is totally subjective either way. I like Vits and think he's a great man. But it is my opinion his career is overrated and his brother did all the heavy lifting in that era.

We see things pretty closely historically ( you rank him top 15 ) Top12? in an accomplishment sense and head to head we are even more aligned. What left is shades of grey.

Yes. I consider lot of things in my rankings including blow out KO defeats ( which several members of your own top ten historical rankings have ) . I take into account bad lopsided losses too, as well as embarrassing defeats to non ring magazine opponents. You should too.

In his case Vitali didn't not lose after Lewis ( not getting a re-match either ) and did not lose being an older fighter a remaining dominant at age 41. You could say both Vitali losses happened when he took the fights on less than two weeks notice , and injures not ring ability are the reason he lost to TOP TEN RING Magazine ranked opponents. Call him unlucky to lose and he was winning both fights on the score cards. No one would set the terms of a fantasy fight with one guy having a torn shoulder and the other guy being healthy. That's what I saying.

I am applying the same standards to all. I am not however comparing decades in the historical accomplishment rankings! That is head to head stuff and if I may jump temporally to it, I think # 3 man ranked today would beat the three man form 1920-1960. Just like the # 8, nine and #10 man today would beat the # 8,#9 and #10 man from 1920-1960. And to be clear I think this a down time of ranked heavyweight talent since Klitschko retired. This is strictly my judgment . See my detailed era ratings and it will confirm this. The talent of heavyweights today is not as good as it was 10 - 25 years ago.

I am enjoying this conversation and think if your are willing to hear and think about what I say or historical rankings might even be closer aligned.

[Willow The Wisp]

If the question was is he top 15 in ring accomplishments the answer is certainly. Are you with me here? Top 12 you could make room for him. But the question is he top 10?

You choose the group I compare him agaist historically. That's good. But get the felling you are biased against him for his two losses, which if compared to the other champions defeats are much better. You admit he would have won re-match vs Byrd. I say he would have too. I'm 90% sure he would have. Is his loss that bad? Is to loss to Lewis a top 5 heavyweight in you opinion that bad? If you look at you list everyone on it has worse defeats. Everyone. Some are early KO losses, lopsided defeats on the score cards, or losses to no top ten men ranked much lower by ring magazine standards. At least you not against most of the points made in the artcile.

And we aren't talking head to head ratings. I would rate Vitali higher in this format. Others have said they would too.

There are several paths toward greatness. Some are numerically quantifiable, others not.
Louis had Schmeling and Conn, and WW II
Ali had Liston and Foreman, and Vietnam
Holmes had Norton and Cooney
Foreman had Frazier and Moorer, and an afro
Lewis had Ruddock and Tua
Holyfield had Douglas and Tyson
Tyson had Berbick and Spinks, and that look
Wlad had big numbers
Liston had Folley, Patterson and Williams
Frazier had Ali and Ellis

.....and each one had other stuff too.
Stuff that Vitali perhaps did not have.

Above, you can note that I place Vitali very high, where he belongs. To have earned anything higher, he would have needed to knock out his brother.