Vitali Klitschko, the last great heavyweight

[Dr. Z]

So you didn't say "How can a guy who fought 10 ring magazine contenders" in the Why have modern fighters not evolved to be better than SRR thread post #331? Interesting. Maybe you should go edit that before anyone else sees it. You also bet 10 fighters couldn't be named who fought more ring ranked contenders, and you claimed there weren't 15 heavyweights with a better resume than Vits. All proven false.

So you won't admit you mistake claim Vitali only beat 6 ring magazine raked fighters! You are clearly wrong here.

You did not name 15 heavyweight who beat better either although that wasn't part of the bet. The bet was clear, I said I can name more than six which you listed. As suspected aren't going to honor those terms.

[JAB5239]

So you won't admit you mistake claim Vitali only beat 6 ring magazine raked fighters! You are clearly wrong here.

You did not name 15 heavyweight who beat better either although that wasn't part of the bet. The bet was clear, I said I can name more than six which you listed. As suspected aren't going to honor those terms.

I believe, I and could certainly be wrong, that I said he beat 6 or 7. You could certainly point me to the post where I supposedly said this and I will gladly admit being wrong. And if you need me to I can show you where you made the claim that I couldn't name 15 heavyweights with a better resume. I named 20 if I recall correctly and you said you could pick holes in them. I never said that was the bet. The bet was to name 10 fighters with more wins against Ring ranked opponents. That was done and you welched. I'm calling you out on your claim that Vits fighting 10 ranked contenders. That has nit been proven. On top of that you refuse to answer how his resume is so impressive when many of the guys he did fight who were ranked disappeared never to be seen in the top 10 again. That is why I've been saying his resume is weak.

[Dr. Z]

I believe, I and could certainly be wrong, that I said he beat 6 or 7. You could certainly point me to the post where I supposedly said this and I will gladly admit being wrong. And if you need me to I can show you where you made the claim that I couldn't name 15 heavyweights with a better resume. I named 20 if I recall correctly and you said you could pick holes in them. I never said that was the bet. The bet was to name 10 fighters with more wins against Ring ranked opponents. That was done and you welched. I'm calling you out on your claim that Vits fighting 10 ranked contenders. That has nit been proven. On top of that you refuse to answer how his resume is so impressive when many of the guys he did fight who were ranked disappeared never to be seen in the top 10 again. That is why I've been saying his resume is weak.

Good, you are admitting you can be wrong. You said 6, which is wrong. Anyone can come with 20 names. The fact is many of the ranked men you claim are small men, some of whom look visibly bad on film and would not be ranked men today! The last time a sub 210 pound man was ranked by ring magazine was when? The answer is many years back. You might find 2 names in the past 25 years and there have been 50+ men ranked! Think about it. Vitali would steam roll them. He did fight two such men that were blown up cruiser weight champions ( Norris and Hide ) and they lasted less than three full rounds.

Vitali fought all 200+ men, did use any color line, and fought men from many nations. His record has one fighter on it with a losing record when he meet him. Compare that to the past champions that used the color line of the past, fighting mainly USA and UK opponents, and few Eastern Europeans and Cubans. Sure there are some exceptions but its not close the limitation of the past.

In addition he has faced several other formerly ranked ring magazine ranked men and other champions on his record. All of the above is true. Now do you really think the contenders of the past from 1920-1960 better? You did not answer this question. The reason some of his contenders disappeared is due to the fact that are more men competing today and they come from a much greater diversity of nations. Fighters appear and disappear in the ranking all of the time. Vitali resume is not weak as you claim. You don't understand the above and he has fought solid competiion relative to the 10-20 names of ring magazine ranked men with a much better winning percentage if your being honest. Doesn't he? Another question for you. I like an answer.

You do seem to be admitting some things, which is the first step.

[Ivich]

Good, you are admitting you can be wrong. You said 6, which is wrong. Anyone can come with 20 names. The fact is many of the ranked men you claim are small men, some of whom look visibly bad on film and would not be ranked men today! The last time a sub 210 pound man was ranked by ring magazine was when? The answer is many years back. You might find 2 names in the past 25 years and there have been 50+ men ranked! Think about it. Vitali would steam roll them. He did fight two such men that were blown up cruiser weight champions ( Norris and Hide ) and they lasted less than three full rounds.

Vitali fought all 200+ men, did use any color line, and fought men from many nations. His record has one fighter on it with a losing record when he meet him. Compare that to the past champions that used the color line of the past, fighting mainly USA and UK opponents, and few Eastern Europeans and Cubans. Sure there are some exceptions but its not close the limitation of the past.

In addition he has faced several other formerly ranked ring magazine ranked men and other champions on his record. All of the above is true. Now do you really think the contenders of the past from 1920-1960 better? You did not answer this question. The reason some of his contenders disappeared is due to the fact that are more men competing today and they come from a much greater diversity of nations. Fighters appear and disappear in the ranking all of the time. Vitali resume is not weak as you claim. You don't understand the above and he has fought solid competiion relative to the 10-20 names of ring magazine ranked men with a much better winning percentage if your being honest. Doesn't he? Another question for you. I like an answer.

You do seem to be admitting some things, which is the first step.

The usual squirming and bull****ting, you challenged Jab to name ten heavyweights with more wins over ranked contenders than Vitali who has 7.
No mention of their size in comparison with todays heavies,or how they would fare against Vitali.
You have been given 14 men with more wins against top ten Ring ranked opponents than Vitali and ignored them.
You are a disgusting , shameless, cheating liar, and bet welcher, and now everybody on this forum knows that, as everyone on Classic ESB already does.

[Dr. Z]

You bet lost , say you ,ten find more wins other fighter
Fourteen fighters more wins have than seven.
Schmeling 8
Baer 9
Sharkey 10
Frazier 8
Walcott 10
Charles 13
Ali 25
Lewis 12
Holmes 12
Tyson 10
Patterson 9
Holyfield 12
Liston 8
Louis 26

Total 14

Where did you get these sources. It's clear the work isn't you own. Prove it by naming the source and showing it via link! I want to see their rank WHEN the fights happened. I bet they all were not heavyweight fights with men over 190 pounds! Also what is the winning percentage of the firsts vs ring magazine ranked men? It's worse than Vitali's right. Yes, it is.

By not provided a link you are guilty of plagiarism among other things.

Again you source is?

Bundana is correct on what he says.

[JAB5239]

Where did you get these sources. It's clear the work isn't you own. Prove it by naming the source and showing it via link! I want to see their rank WHEN the fights happened. I bet they all were not heavyweight fights with men over 190 pounds! Also what is the winning percentage of the firsts vs ring magazine ranked men? It's worse than Vitali's right. Yes, it is.

By not provided a link you are guilty of plagiarism among other things.

Again you source is?

Bundana is correct on what he says.

More pushing back of the goalposts!! Anything over 175 was heavyweight until December of 1979. Quit trying to make excuses.

[Dr. Z]

More pushing back of the goalposts!! Anything over 175 was heavyweight until December of 1979. Quit trying to make excuses.

Where did he get the sources? He is not showing them for a reason, he is full of it. I not pushing back anything I am listing facts. I was replying to Mr. lair aka Ivich.

Now you can reply to this as it addressed to you.

Good, you are admitting you can be wrong. You said 6, which is wrong. Anyone can come with 20 names. The fact is many of the ranked men you claim are small men, some of whom look visibly bad on film and would not be ranked men today! The last time a sub 210 pound man was ranked by ring magazine was when? The answer is many years back. You might find 2 names in the past 25 years and there have been 50+ men ranked! Think about it. Vitali would steam roll them. He did fight two such men that were blown up cruiser weight champions ( Norris and Hide ) and they lasted less than three full rounds.

Vitali fought all 200+ men, did use any color line, and fought men from many nations. His record has one fighter on it with a losing record when he meet him. Compare that to the past champions that used the color line of the past, fighting mainly USA and UK opponents, and few Eastern Europeans and Cubans. Sure there are some exceptions but its not close the limitation of the past.

In addition he has faced several other formerly ranked ring magazine ranked men and other champions on his record. All of the above is true. Now do you really think the contenders of the past from 1920-1960 better? You did not answer this question. The reason some of his contenders disappeared is due to the fact that are more men competing today and they come from a much greater diversity of nations. Fighters appear and disappear in the ranking all of the time. Vitali resume is not weak as you claim. You don't understand the above and he has fought solid competiion relative to the 10-20 names of ring magazine ranked men with a much better winning percentage if your being honest. Doesn't he? Another question for you. I like an answer.

You do seem to be admitting some things, which is the first step.

[JAB5239]

Where did he get the sources? He is not showing them for a reason, he is full of it. I not pushing back anything I am listing facts. I was replying to Mr. lair aka Ivich.

Now you can reply to this as it addressed to you.

Good, you are admitting you can be wrong. You said 6, which is wrong. Anyone can come with 20 names. The fact is many of the ranked men you claim are small men, some of whom look visibly bad on film and would not be ranked men today! The last time a sub 210 pound man was ranked by ring magazine was when? The answer is many years back. You might find 2 names in the past 25 years and there have been 50+ men ranked! Think about it. Vitali would steam roll them. He did fight two such men that were blown up cruiser weight champions ( Norris and Hide ) and they lasted less than three full rounds.

Vitali fought all 200+ men, did use any color line, and fought men from many nations. His record has one fighter on it with a losing record when he meet him. Compare that to the past champions that used the color line of the past, fighting mainly USA and UK opponents, and few Eastern Europeans and Cubans. Sure there are some exceptions but its not close the limitation of the past.

In addition he has faced several other formerly ranked ring magazine ranked men and other champions on his record. All of the above is true. Now do you really think the contenders of the past from 1920-1960 better? You did not answer this question. The reason some of his contenders disappeared is due to the fact that are more men competing today and they come from a much greater diversity of nations. Fighters appear and disappear in the ranking all of the time. Vitali resume is not weak as you claim. You don't understand the above and he has fought solid competiion relative to the 10-20 names of ring magazine ranked men with a much better winning percentage if your being honest. Doesn't he? Another question for you. I like an answer.

You do seem to be admitting some things, which is the first step.

You just keep on changing things. It doesn't matter, any of this nonsense. Just admit you lost the bet. You've been proven wrong about everything and you just keep trying to find ways out of it. It's not happening. And find the post where I said six and I will say I was wrong. Either way, his resume stinks.

[them_apples]

Stop putting typing words I never said. I said I'd bet you that Vitali beat more that the six ranked ring magazine fighters which you claimed! Admit you are wrong here, there are more than six and this is not counting Soils. Can you at least do that?

Its important to note, Vitalis resume is average in the ATG rankings, he stays out of the top 10. This post was about given he faced better competition, depending on the style, I think he would prove himself a “great” fighter in the sense that he checked all the boxes off that a great fighter requires, however never was given the options to prove it. His resume does not prove that he’s great.

here are my reasons, based on the eye test why he Was great, and the last great heavyweight. Meaning yeah, he would have beat every single fighter of the current era. Bar non

1: he was still VERY game in the Lewis fight even at the stoppage. He had a Marciano level cut on his face and was still itching to take Lewis out. I don’t think prime for prime he beats Lewis at all, but on that night I still would have given him a great shot at beating Lewis, even with that cut on his face. Lewis would have been trying to instinctively save himself for the last round, Vitali could have jumped on him during these late middle rounds and possibly taken him out, changing history. They stopped this fight but Vitali showed no quit at all - meaning in a past era it would have gone longer, certainly.

2: he has great height, AND he uses it properly. Meaning, he would do well against short fighters unlike other tall fighters who actually do poorly against short fighters. If he had a longer reach it would have been deadly. His short reach allowed him to get hit more. He is 6 ft 8 literally nearly Furys height with superior skills and training. His broad shoulders and 81 reach means his actual arms were short.

3: his chin is excellent. His legs never went (at least to my knowledge, I haven’t seen all of his fights. So correct me on this. If the legs don’t go it means you never hurt them, even if they got knocked down. They simply got knocked off their feet.

4: better than average defense, he rides punches and fights with his weight on the back foot, its an annoying style that requires the opposing fighter to step in more than they are used to doing.

[Clegg]

I like Vitali. Most of his fights were entertaining and he seems like a good guy. But his resume is very weak. There are different ways to rank great fighters, but one way I normally go with is 'who are their 3 best wins?'. The answer for Vitali would not be that impressive. Second thing I look at is how long was somebody the clear champion of a division. For Vitali the answer is 'never' so again not impressive. To be clear I'm not saying others have to follow my criteria, just explaining why I can't rate him highly.

I don't like to criticise a guy for quitting too much. Because boxing is a brutal sport. But it does affect your legacy. There is another thread in this section about Marciano being overrated. Well on paper you could come up with lots of reasons why Vitali was better than Marciano. But on the other hand, Marciano would never quit with an injured shoulder. He was the guy who got the most out of his qualities. We have seen guys with broken jaws, hands, shoulders still do all they can to win. Vitali was not willing to do that. That's part of why Marciano was the best of his era and Vitali was not.

What makes it worse is that so many fighters in history suffered a loss and just had to run it back. Whether they were chasing legacy or hurt ego or whatever. Vitali instead had his bro fight Byrd. That's so cynical. I feel the K bros lose some credit for handling each other's rematches. No other fighter in history needed to do that. Then even after that, Byrd rebuilds and at the time Lennox retires, Vitali and Byrd are ranked as the top 2 guys. But Vitali instead fought lower ranked guys. He could've become champ of the division and avenged a loss but chose a different path.

People also have this hard-luck view of Vitali that I don't support. For example he was unlucky to get badly cut vs Lennox in a fight he was doing well in. But really, cuts are part of boxing, and he was given time to try and get the stoppage and he couldn't do it. If anything he was fortunate to get an out of shape Lennox.

Reading through the thread, Dr Z (who has clearly lost the bet and is embarrassing himself twisting in the wind) wants to claim that Vitali beating Cubans proves greatness. Wants to claim beating heavy guys proves greatness. Well let's look at that in context. First of it's unfair to criticise past fighters for not facing Cubans if they had no way of doing it. They didn't avoid them. Very few ATGs have a win over a boxer of Arab descent. Does that mean Barrera deserves extra special credit for beating Hamed? Of course not.

If somebody clearly beat Rigo or Lara, they get credit for dealing with the Cuban style at the elite level. But Vitali beat Solis and Gomez. They were not great fighters so who cares where they came from? As for 'Vitali beat big men', Gomez was a cruiserweight who added fat to move up, then moved back down to cruiserweight afterwards. Solis made his name as an amateur at 200lbs, he was obese when he faced Vitali, so much so that his leg gave way in the first round! And this is being cited as evidence of Vitali's greatness, nobody who watched these fights would come away impressed.

If Vitali's injury losses don't count, why does injury his win over Solis count? Vitali probably holds the record for facing the most out of shape flabby guys in title fights. Remember the harpooned whale Kirk Johnson? We can dress that up as him beating 'big men' though I guess...

Then there is the suggestion that Vitali deserves credit for not drawing the colour line. When was the last time a HW champ was able to do that? The 1930s? Such a bizarre thing to credit a modern fighter for.

His fans go on and on about Lennox retiring as another case of bad luck for Vitali. But what about how Vitali was supposed to fight Rahman but instead he pulled out injured and retired? Then when Rahman is gone, Vitali comes back. Rahman would've been Vitali's best win. Seems like he benefitted from a timely retirement even more so than Lennox but his fans don't seem to mind that so much.

Lennox and Byrd are really the only 2 top level guys on his record, it's not a coincidence that those are the 2 to beat him. Vitali had a realistic chance to face and beat Lennox, Byrd and Rahman but instead beat none of those guys. He didn't rematch Byrd despite them being active at the same time for years afterwards, which is meaningful considering his fans think he deserves credit simply for wanting a rematch with Lennox.