Comments Thread For: James Toney Too Risky For Vitali Klitschko, Says Goossen

[True Guru]

Here is the typical mark of ****** *******s who think they possess the truth and try to discredit everybody who have a different opinion. It means : ''only a moron would think otherwise than me''. Pathetic. Byrd gave Vitali trouble, Johnson gave Vitali trouble, and a 2003 Toney was slicker than both these guys. Vitali can't adjust to slick fighters : fact. So a 2003 Toney gives a competitive fight to Vitali, no doubt.

After 9 rds V Byrd the scorecards were : 88-83, 88-83, 89-82
After 12 V Johnson the scorecards were : 119-109, 120-108, 120-108

Byrd did okay at times but he was being easily defeated.

[Boxing Scene]

After 9 rds V Byrd the scorecards were : 88-83, 88-83, 89-82
After 12 V Johnson the scorecards were : 119-109, 120-108, 120-108

Byrd did okay at times but he was being easily defeated.

I actually read an article once where the writer said that he thought Byrd was on his way to knocking out Vitali when Vitali quit. Have you ever heard anything as ****ing ****** as that.

Vitali basically won every round.

[True Guru]

I actually read an article once where the writer said that he thought Byrd was on his way to knocking out Vitali when Vitali quit. Have you ever heard anything as ****ing ****** as that.

Vitali basically won every round.

Wlad had two fights with Byrd and lost probably 1 round.

[Tiozzo]

You make a lot of sweeping generalizations: "Everybody who is not a Klit nuthugger with tell you." Really? So anyone who enjoys a Klitschko fight is a "nuthugger?" Grow up. You can call me a "nuthugger" if it makes you feel better, but I love watching Vitali fight, and I also like watching Wlad, but admit under Manny he has gotten a little too cautious (though when I saw Wlad KO Calvin Brock at Madison Square Garden it was very exciting). What you call "ugly" as far as Vitali's style I call brutally effective. You see how Vitali confused and destroyed Arreola, who has had little problem beating everyone else he's faced, by utilizing footwork that people said he didn't possess, and by throwing punches from all kinds of angles. If you really appreciate boxing, you will appreciate what Vitali brings to the table, even if it isn't Ali-like in style. There is more than one way to fight, and Vitali is unique.

I'm afraid that it seems you either are a Klit nuthugger or a hater like me, I'm forced to enter the logic, no middle. I can't even go out and say Byrd was effective against Vitali, which is true, or say Toney 2003 would have given him a tough fight, because I have all the ******ed Klits nuthuggers on my back saying ''Vitali would have DESTROYED Toney, blablabla'', calling me a hater because I'm not all-over Vitali's **** like them.Those same people are the ones who say the Klits could have beaten any heavyweight in the history of boxing. That makes me laugh.

Arreola is a fat slob, there was no way he could beat Vitali, so that win is not all that impressive to me.

And there is a generalization of your own. I am a huge boxing fan, and that's why I dislike Vitali. Freddie Roach thinks they are boring too, and the man know what he's talking about, and he's no hater.

[Tiozzo]

I acknowledge your right to find anyone you want to boring. But when you call Vitali Klitschko a "*****" I can't really take you seriously. Any man who can stand and trade toe-to-toe with Lennox Lewis and Corrie Sanders is no *****, my friend. It's very easy to say that from behind the comfort of your keyboard. If you want to be taken seriously, you should tone down the rhetoric, because statements like that mark you as hater, though you claim not to be. And whether you like him or not, Vitali is sure-fire Boxing HOF material. That doesn't mean you have to like him. I wasn't a fan of Ali's either, but I'd be ****** to say he wasn't great. He obviously was.

It's pretty obvious I called him a ***** because I was getting pissed and tired with the comments such as ''Vitali would DESTROY'' BLABLABLA. As I have already stated, Vitali acted like a ***** against Byrd, and you know it : he quit. Quitting is not cool. Vitali made his own decision : to quit in a fight that was in the bag. Funny how you avoid to talk about that. I have already assessed his courage against Lewis. But that doesn't erase the ***** move in the Byrd fight.

''It hurts too much.'' - Vitali

Just a reminder.

I hope you're not trying to compare Vitali's ''greatness'' to Ali's, or else, I'll have to jump to conclusions...

[Tiozzo]

After 9 rds V Byrd the scorecards were : 88-83, 88-83, 89-82
After 12 V Johnson the scorecards were : 119-109, 120-108, 120-108

Byrd did okay at times but he was being easily defeated.

........... And after nine rounds, Byrd had landed almost as many punches as Vitali.

[Tiozzo]

Wlad had two fights with Byrd and lost probably 1 round.

Wlad, unlike Vitali, had Byrd's number, and he totally dominated Byrd, that is crystal clear.

[Dave Rado]

Here are the punch stats of Byrd vs Vitali at the end of round 8.

Vitali landed 116 out of 436 punches = 26 %
Byrd landed 100 of 246 punches = 41 %

So yes, we can see, with the help of evidence, how right you are : Byrd was totally ineffective with 41 % of his punches landed and only 16 landed punches less in total than Vitali. You rock.

In round 9, Byrd landed 24 out of 38 punches = 63 %
Vitali landed 17 of 66 = 26 %

Then Vitali, ahead on the score cards, elected to quit because of an injury.

Again, you are right : Byrd was totally ineffective.

Do you seriously think fights are or should be scored on the basis of punch stats? If you really think that, you must believe Calzaghe won all 12 rounds against Hopkins - whereas all boxing experts thought that fight was actually extremely close and some thought Hopkins should have got the decision. Punch stats have absolutely nothing to do with how professional fights are scored. You're confusing professional boxing with the amateur game.

Two of the three judges were American - so if there was any bias in the judging it would have been in Byrd's favour. And HBO also scored it massively in favour of Klitschko.

When most of your punches are weak and ineffective, which most of Byrd's were, you need to outland a hard-hitting opponent like Vitali by a large margin in order to win rounds. Byrd couldn't outland him at all, except in two rounds (and he lost one of those two rounds in the opinion of HBO, and in my opinion) - despite the fact that Vitali tore his rotator cuff in the third round, and couldn't use his left as effectively as normal from then on.

Furthermore, Vitali improved massively after 2000. He has a much better ability to judge space and distance now than he had back then.

[Dave Rado]

Lots of people have bashed Vitali for quitting in a fight with 3 rnds to go which he had already won on the cards. He just had to survive. I'm not a hater

Quitting against Leonard didn't stop Duran being regarded as an ATG - in fact, Duran is in many boxing historians' top 10 fighters of all time. Vitali more than made up for that fight in his subsequent career.

[Dave Rado]

Wlad, unlike Vitali, had Byrd's number, and he totally dominated Byrd, that is crystal clear.

Wlad did it with his jab. But Vitali couldn't jab properly after the third round, because of his torn rotator cuff.