Vitali

[LacedUp]

Wlad was the dominant one, but don't forget to take Vitali's 4 yr layoff into consideration, and measure his overall achievements on this background. His comeback is unmatched in HW history.

And when you mention 'rewatchable fights'; again, it's a matter of taste. You don't find the Sanders fight 'rewatchable'?

Why would I do that exactly? He took 4 years off where he could have fought some good fighters, but came back and fought the Charr's and Sosnowski's of the world.

His comeback is certainly not unmatched in heavyweight history, I don't know why you would think that at all.

Hide couldnt be ranked since he was the WBO champ, but you may be right, he maybe wasnt a top 10 guy in public opinion as there was still alot of high caliber fighters at heavy ie lewis, holyfield, tyson, tua, ike, grant, vitali, wlad, etc

Chisora should have been top 10... I think over the last few years he has clearly shown he is somewhere around 6-10,, Regardless the sanctioning bodies have horrible rankings anyways, but in terms of public opinion I think its safe to assume that Chisora is a legit heavy, may not win the big one but he is a player in the heavy division, kinda like a poor man's version of ray mercer. Only guys that you could rate higher than him over the past few years are klits, haye, povetkin, fury, adamek, pulev, arreola, stiverne


But yes, Vitali's resume is truely very poor in terms of ATG,,,, Solid champ but not an ATG resume

Hide wasn't considered a top 10 fighter regardless of his belt. He had lost to some less than stellar opposition and everytime by KO. But exactly, I mean if you look at the caliber of fighters at the time - Clearly Hide was not in the top 10 and probably not top 15 either. His WBO belt at the time was considered like the IBO is today. A non entity - he was certainly not considered the champion. It's only now that the Klitschko fans like to say Vitali is a three time world champion because he won a WBO belt, but at the time, he wasn't even considered a champion. Funny how history gets rewritten.

No I absolutely agree. He should have had a legit ranking with Ring, forget the orgs rankings, on the back of the Helenius 'defeat'. Which is also why he got the fight in the first place.

However, I think it's safe to say that Chisora was nothing but a prospect at the time he fought Vitali, he'd lost to Fury, and should have had the victory against Helenius, but he wasn't the fighter he is today. Not in my opinion at least. That's not really taking anything away from Vitali, because I think it was a good fight - but I certainly don't think Chisora was the most worthy opponent at the time.

His resume simply isn't good enough, and he is not good enough to require all time great status.

[Weltschmerz]

You gotta love the Son King excuse. Unfortunately it doesn't work since Wlad fought Byrd immediately after.

Actually it makes plenty of sense, if you refrain from using my argument out of context.

[JAB5239]

Did you bother to read my arguments? From your response, it seems not. You provide no counter arguments.

Let's not get into the Vitali-Lewis thing. It's time to let that one go.

Actually its relevant to the discussion. You only want to let it go because it doesn't favor you argument.

[JAB5239]

Actually it makes plenty of sense, if you refrain from using my argument out of context.

If there were so many problems with King why have dealt with him for the first Byrd fight? If there were so many problems why make the Wlad-Byrd fight? Why couldn't Vits have rematched him instead of Wlad fighting him? You keep making excuses where there aren't any.