Name your three choices for fighters who built/improved their rep on a loss

[TuPrincipe]

dammit, vitali has beat every opponent put in front of him, barring technicalities he suffered from the lewis and byrd fight. and still, outboxing them. i'd garauntee the rematches would be different.

moochi, vitali has proved that he at very least can hang with any fighter you can name.

back to the subject, berrera and morales was a helluva trilogy that boosted both of thier careers.

tarver is certainly a great example also.

gimme a bit to think about this one. it's a good question.

Just because you can hang with the best of them doesn't deserve merit to become a HW champ. Vitali is a good boxer, but he does not deserve to be the man in the division.

[Bozo_no no]

dammit, vitali has beat every opponent put in front of him, barring technicalities he suffered from the lewis and byrd fight. and still, outboxing them. i'd garauntee the rematches would be different.

And how much does that actaually say?

Outside of Byrd and Lewis who he LOST to, LOOK at who he's fought. There's Donald, Johnson, Sanders, Obed Sullivan, Orlin Norris, Herbie Hide.

SO WHAT if he's beaten a long list of fighters when it's capped off with names like that. Outside of LOSING to the two top fighters he's ever faced, he has a weak overall resume.

This is typical nuthugging thinking.

[j]

well bozo, who is there to fight. you seem to act like there is some dangerous fighter out there that he's ducking. the klitschkos' in general have always had trouble getting people to fight them.


and bozo, by jumping on every thread with the name klitschko mentioned, what does that make you? an anti-klitschko nuthugger?

[Bozo_no no]

well bozo, who is there to fight. you seem to act like there is some dangerous fighter out there that he's ducking. the klitschkos' in general have always had trouble getting people to fight them.


and bozo, by jumping on every thread with the name klitschko mentioned, what does that make you? an anti-klitschko nuthugger?

I just find it funny how you act like your so much above all the debating about the hype around Vitali, yet you drop a big "Damn it Vitali has beat everyone he's ever fought" talking like you can't fathom why everyone doesn't think the way you do.

Who was there to fight in his whole career?

A lot of guys.

But you (and others) constantly talk like he deserves so much praise for beating everyone he's fought outside of his two LOSSES (not technicalites, losses), when everyone he's fought outside of Lewis and Byrd range from meidocre to out right Tomatoe Cans.

Who is there to fight now? After this fight with Rahman, anyone with a title, or James Toney.

[Leo Pradun]

Here's my top three, just off the top of my head:



1. Evander Holyfield (vs. Rid**** Bowe I)

2. Vitali Klitschko (vs. Lennox Lewis)

3. Mike Tyson (vs. Kevin McBride)
















(Okay, I couldn't think of a third one off the top of my head...)

how bout Lennox Lewis vs Oliver Mccall, Lewis hired Manny Steward and won the championship after that fight, also Danny Williams win over Mike Tyson hyped him up to a shot at the hw title

[j]

bozo, props to ya for not being an *******. you did misinterpretate the way i stated the sentence. hard to convey the subtleties of communication on the net i guess.

it's not that i feel he needs to be praised much. not at all. in fact, i like him being an underdog anyways.

but are you saying ruiz is a great opponent that adds credibility to vk's career? and james toney???

we probably differ in opinion on this, but i don't feel belts make a fighter.

[Bozo_no no]

but are you saying ruiz is a great opponent that adds credibility to vk's career? and james toney???

we probably differ in opinion on this, but i don't feel belts make a fighter.

The bottom line is that he needs to fight the other title holders. You (and others who think like you) seem to think that because the other title holders aren't very threatening, that there's no problem with him taking fights agaisnt guys less threatening.

That's a cop out.

The division is poor, he's one of 4 title holders who all have been inactive and facing poor opposition.

He needs to fight whoever else has a title.

The division needs to be unified before anyone is refered to as "the" champion.

Because the division is so poor, all he can do to garner credibility is to become a unifed champion. If he continues to take lesser fights and doesn't unify, all he's going to be left with is a meidocre overall resume, and the fact he was one of four men to hold 'a' title in one of the weakest points in the division's history.

[j]

i like how you assume how i think.

in fact, i agree he needs to fight the other title holders. so where's the cop-out here?

[Bozo_no no]

i like how you assume how i think.

in fact, i agree he needs to fight the other title holders. so where's the cop-out here?

You post on this topic all the time, it's no secret what you think.

we probably differ in opinion on this, but i don't feel belts make a fighter.

I'd take that, when you mentioned you saw no point in him fighting Ruiz, to mean you don't think he needs to unify the titles.

Right now (granted it's a mandatory) he's fighting John Ruiz's leftovers. Ruiz easilly delt with the plodding and unskilled Rahman.

So if he's fighting a guy like Rahman, why not fight the guy that beat Rahman who carries the WBA title?

And then rematch the guy who beat him who has the IBF title?

Let me "assume" what you think about that.

Big bad Don King won't allow that to happen, right?

[TuPrincipe]

I'm gonna have to agree with Bozo on this one.

Vitali's fighting leftovers or crappy mandatory's. Even Rahman has a better legacy then Vitali he at least had 2 belts and he KO'd Lewis which is much better then ANYTHING Vitali has done.