Dude if a blind man from the south pole who never saw a fight said Vitali was better you'd agree with that person. I just think Adamek's trainer is positioning for a wlad fight and the payday that comes with it.
Possibly, who could blame him but based on the history and opponents of the last two brothers, it's painfully obvious that Vitali has always been better than Wlad and the trainer is just saying what most experts say as well.
Possibly, who could blame him but based on the history and opponents of the last two brothers, it's painfully obvious that Vitali has always been better than Wlad and the trainer is just saying what most experts say as well.
Example: Dan Rafael
Wlad would beat every opponent Vitali has faced since his comeback as convincingly and more convincingly (Chisora, Briggs, Johnson) than Vitali did.
Vitali was a lot better in his prime, now Wlad would beat Vitali.
Nah, Vitali has intangibles that Wlad doesn't have. He would still beat up on him. He's a fighter who happens to make money at it and hold titles. Wlad is a businessman who learned how to fight. They both know this and have said it many times. Even Emanuel Steward said it.
Possibly, who could blame him but based on the history and opponents of the last two brothers, it's painfully obvious that Vitali has always been better than Wlad and the trainer is just saying what most experts say as well.
Example: Dan Rafael
if you, dan, and the trainer agree, well then this thread should end.
Wlad would beat every opponent Vitali has faced since his comeback as convincingly and more convincingly (Chisora, Briggs, Johnson) than Vitali did.
Possibly, but then again that's a guess isn't it? How about Chisora? With that same pressure on Wlad, there's no telling how he would have reacted based on previous fights.
And, on the other hand, Vitali would be undefeated for Wlad's whole career resume barring a freak shoulder injury.
if you, dan, and the trainer agree, well then this thread should end.
Ok, good, glad we agree. Me siding with experts over you means something whether you admit it or not. It means I'm closer to reality that you are, seeing as how you are a Vitali hater.
Lol, how did he never prove it? He beat the dog piss out of two guys that stopped Wlad and captured the lineal title while doing so.
Wlad is champ because Vitali allowed him to be. Period.
Capturing the lineal title by beating Sanders... Impressive...
The only reason Wlad was never lineal champion was because Vitali was #1 and they didn't fight for obvious reason.
Barrett, Byrd x2, Schulz, Mercer, McCline, Peter x2, Austin, Brewster, Ibragimov, Thompson, Rahman, Chagaev, Haye, Brock and Chambers.
You don't prove you're the better fighter by beating common opponents (handing Purrity his 15th loss shouldn't impress anyone). That can be chalked up to styles.
You prove you're the better fighter by accomplishing the things a better fighter would accomplish. Vitali took too many soft opponents. Wlad had the better competition. He also has the better wins. He has accomplished way more than Vitali has, and he's got longer to go.
Your only arguement is Vitali's body was too fragile for him to achieve that, and you speculate that he could have otherwise.
Well Wlad PROVED that he could. History will reflect that
I've Said This Forever! It Doesn't Matter, They Aren't Fighting Each Other!
The media, boxing press have always thought Wladamir was the best of the brothers, and I couldn't disagree more. There's a reason Lennox Lewis wouldn't give Vitali a rematch. Their fight was stopped on account of Lewis' laces that opened up a deep cut on his eyebrow. Prior, Vitali beat the living hell out of Lennox from the opening round. Today Lennox still doesn't want to talk about fighting Vitali. Wladamir had his one moment where his chin was exposed and got KO'd. He's comeback from all of that, but Vitali has never stumbled, and he won't. Would loved to have seen Vitali in his prime fight Larry Holmes. Larry would have KO'd Wladamir. Larry and Vitali would have been a classic!
Comment