Who WK and VK have ?

[Tiozzo]

Ali has Foreman and Liston.

Frazier has Ali.

Foreman has Frazier and Moorer.

Norton has Ali.

Marciano has Walcott and Charles.

Bowe has Holyfield.

Holyfield has Tyson, Bowe and Douglas.

Lewis has Holyfield and Tyson.

Douglas has Tyson.

Tyson has M. Spinks and Bruno.

Tunney has Dempsey.

Dempsey has Sharkey and Willard.

Schmeling has Louis.

Walcott has Charles.

Charles has Louis.

Louis has Schmeling.

Johnson has Jeffries.

Corbett has Sullivan.

Fitzsimmons has Corbett.

Jeffries has Fitzsimmons and T. Sharkey.

Patterson has Moore.

Liston has Patterson.

Holmes has Norton, Mercer and Shavers.

M. Spinks has Holmes.



Who Wlad and Vitali have ?

Because when you start saying these guys are ATGs in the HW division, you got to back it up with something. I don't see no defining fights on either's records. I don't see no HOF worthy fighters. Saying they would beat Ali and Louis in fantasy matches is no argument to rank them anywhere near those proven fighters, because Ali and Louis records beat WK and VK records by a country mile.

People usually agree to say Wlad's best win is Byrd. For the record, Chris Byrd is a blown-up middleweight, and Boxrec ranks him at no. 89 AT at HW (for what it's worth).

89. Chris Byrd. 279 points, 41(22)-5(4)-1, 1993-2009 southpaw, Las Vegas, Nevada, United States.

Then you have Vitali. His best win is D. Williams, Arreola, Peter or Corrie Sanders. I personnaly pick Sanders. Good fighters, but not exacltly the kind of guys who will define your legacy. Sanders is ranked at no. 248 by Boxrec (again, for what it may be worth).

248. Corrie Sanders 127 points, 42(31)-4(4)-0, 1989-2008, southpaw Pretoria, Gauteng, South Africa.

You're as good/great as the people you beat. Dominating bums/average/good fighter like the Klits have been doing and continue to do is OK, but this is no argument whatsoever to start discussions about them being ATGs. With the state that the division is in, you better forget it, they probably will never face a great fighter and get that defining fight.

So you better quit the AT top 10 HW discussions. Wlad will break into the top 20 at best, and Vitali into the top 25 at best.

[RimmyDelicious]

Some of those 'greats', like Sharkey, Douglas, Bruno, Willard etc. weren't great at all. The entire concept of having to beat someone great to be great is flawed. Frazier became a great because he beat Ali, Ali became a great by beating Liston, Liston became great by beating Patterson (a blown up middleweight, like Chris Byrd, only smaller), and Patterson became great by...oh, wait a minute, Patterson never beat a great fighter.

Tyson becamse great by beating Bruno and Spinks? Spinks was a semi-retired light heavyweight who was only in it for the payday, and I won't even address Bruno. So, by your own logic, Tyson wasn't great. Now, Douglas never beat a great and was maybe the worst lineal heavyweight champion ever, so Holyfield didn't beat a great and wasn't a great himself when Bowe beat him. Lewis beat Holyfield and Tyson, but both of them were old and past their past (well past his best in Mike's case), and as I previously established, neither fighter defeated a prime great fighter at heavyweight anyway.

See, I can do this forever. As for Wlad and Vitali, well, Chris Byrd was as good a win for Wlad as Patterson was for Liston, and that was Liston's only win over a "great". He also beat Rahman, who slayed Lewis, so wasn't Rahman a "great"? Vitali beat Danny Williams, who slayed Tyson, making him a "great". He also KO'd Corrie Sanders, who became great by beating Wlad.

See?

[Tiozzo]

Some of those 'greats', like Sharkey, Douglas, Bruno, Willard etc. weren't great at all. The entire concept of having to beat someone great to be great is flawed. Frazier became a great because he beat Ali, Ali became a great by beating Liston, Liston became great by beating Patterson (a blown up middleweight, like Chris Byrd, only smaller), and Patterson became great by...oh, wait a minute, Patterson never beat a great fighter.

Tyson becamse great by beating Bruno and Spinks? Spinks was a semi-retired light heavyweight who was only in it for the payday, and I won't even address Bruno. So, by your own logic, Tyson wasn't great. Now, Douglas never beat a great and was maybe the worst lineal heavyweight champion ever, so Holyfield didn't beat a great and wasn't a great himself when Bowe beat him. Lewis beat Holyfield and Tyson, but both of them were old and past their past (well past his best in Mike's case), and as I previously established, neither fighter defeated a prime great fighter at heavyweight anyway.

See, I can do this forever. As for Wlad and Vitali, well, Chris Byrd was as good a win for Wlad as Patterson was for Liston, and that was Liston's only win over a "great". He also beat Rahman, who slayed Lewis, so wasn't Rahman a "great"? Vitali beat Danny Williams, who slayed Tyson, making him a "great". He also KO'd Corrie Sanders, who became great by beating Wlad.

See?

good points, I knew someone would come up with these

it is a fact that Tyson has never beaten a great fighter in his prime (Bruno was nothing special and Spinks was at the end of his career, not very active)

but we're not just talking about beating great fighters, but having defining fights too

defining fights can come against fighters who aren't labelled as greats

Holmes had his defining fights against Shavers and Norton, and he sealed his legacy when he beat prime Mercer being past it

same with Tyson, he had his defining fights against Spinks and Bruno, one former undisputed LHW champ, the other a good but limited fighter

Douglas isn't great himself, but his one hit wonder is better than anything on both Klits record, which is why he gotta have at least a mention

again, Sharkey may not be that great, but he still is a far better win than anything on the Klits resumes

of course, we have to take into account the overall level of opposition

for example, Wlad may not have defining fights, he may not have beaten greats, but the overall level of his opposition is good neverthelss, and aside of his quite horrible losses, he has dominated, which is why in my opinion he should enter the top 20 AT at HW when it's all said and done

so in the end, how can he compete in a top 10 against fighters like Ali who beat many greats, who has had many defining fights and whoseoverall level of opposition is the best ever at HW ? you don't have to beat greats to be great, but if you do beat greats, it will make you greater, right ? we have no idea how Wlad would have fared against a Foreman or a Ali, because he has never been in the ring with a fighter even close to being that good

as for Vitali, his resume is almost grotesque, the overall opposition is weak, he will go down in history as the man who has dominated bums and who has been champion a few times

one thing you haven't argued is the best wins of the Klits : Byrd and Sanders

when the best man you have ever beaten is Chris Byrd, no matter how dominant you may have been, it will be a tough task to argue that you belong in a top 10, or even a top 15