Vitali's legacy

[Simurgh]

Are you saying that he isn't?

Oh dear... lol

[K-DOGG]

Many boxing followers discredit Vitali Klitschko's achievements in the ring, claiming his resume to be 'weak', i.e. he hasn't fought good enough opposition to be able to claim greatness.

Will Vitali go down in boxing history as an ATG in your opinion?

Not trying to be one of those "discreditors"; but facts are facts. This is, IMO, the weakest heavyweight division in decades. Not "weakest" in the terms of size nor strength; but of skill level. The Klitschko brothers are two shining stars swimming in murky waters. And that's sad for them.

But, maybe it's not fair to compare the talent in the division today to years past. Unfortunately, the only way to truly judge a fighter's worth is by the competition he fought. And, if the division's not that good and you're smoking everyone or dominating it completely, that makes it really hard to judge your worth.....other than you're doing what a "great" fighter should: beating the hell out of mediocre competition.

Personally, I think the Klitsckos would have fared well in ANY era in history; and maybe even dominated most based on the fact that they are skilled HUGE men. And, let's be honest. If you have a man that is as big as both Klitschkos are and put them in an era where all the other men are 50 LBs or more smaller......and not as skilled in some decades, THEY WILL DO WELL. A good big man vs a good little man favors the big man. A good big man vs a great smaller man means a tough night for the great smaller man; but doesn't necessarily guarantee victory for the giant. Follow?

To condense, yes, I think Vitali Klitsckho deserves to be remembered in years to come as an ATG based on the fact that he dominated the era in which he fought, just as Jack Johnson is remembered by those of us who care to look that far back in time for dominating the era in which he fought. Johnson's best competition came before he won the "World Heavyweight Championship". And while he is often criticized for not giving title shots to the best fighters of his era: Langford, McVey, and Jeannette, it is understandable when you examine the circumstances of the times. Besides, he'd fought and beaten both McVey and Jeannette more than 10 times each before winning the title. Only Langford really got shafted.

With Vitali, the only quality opponent of his era you can say with certainty he didn't face was.....Wladimir. Can anyone understand why that fight didn't happen?? (Well, personally, I've known brothers that fought all the damn time. Why these two couldn't do it and get paid for it is beyond me; but What the Hell do I know, anyway. )

So, yes....despite his competition. However, that factor will make it very hard to rank him in the list of ATG's, because others who came before him had more clearly defined parameters.



PS: I would favor Vitali over Wladimir.

[SBleeder]

This guy is pure jokes. I want him to post some more.

You can read a lot of his gems at heavyweightblog.com. He runs that site.

[Weltschmerz]

Not trying to be one of those "discreditors"; but facts are facts. This is, IMO, the weakest heavyweight division in decades. Not "weakest" in the terms of size nor strength; but of skill level. The Klitschko brothers are two shining stars swimming in murky waters. And that's sad for them.

But, maybe it's not fair to compare the talent in the division today to years past. Unfortunately, the only way to truly judge a fighter's worth is by the competition he fought. And, if the division's not that good and you're smoking everyone or dominating it completely, that makes it really hard to judge your worth.....other than you're doing what a "great" fighter should: beating the hell out of mediocre competition.

Personally, I think the Klitsckos would have fared well in ANY era in history; and maybe even dominated most based on the fact that they are skilled HUGE men. And, let's be honest. If you have a man that is as big as both Klitschkos are and put them in an era where all the other men are 50 LBs or more smaller......and not as skilled in some decades, THEY WILL DO WELL. A good big man vs a good little man favors the big man. A good big man vs a great smaller man means a tough night for the great smaller man; but doesn't necessarily guarantee victory for the giant. Follow?

To condense, yes, I think Vitali Klitsckho deserves to be remembered in years to come as an ATG based on the fact that he dominated the era in which he fought, just as Jack Johnson is remembered by those of us who care to look that far back in time for dominating the era in which he fought. Johnson's best competition came before he won the "World Heavyweight Championship". And while he is often criticized for not giving title shots to the best fighters of his era: Langford, McVey, and Jeannette, it is understandable when you examine the circumstances of the times. Besides, he'd fought and beaten both McVey and Jeannette more than 10 times each before winning the title. Only Langford really got shafted.

With Vitali, the only quality opponent of his era you can say with certainty he didn't face was.....Wladimir. Can anyone understand why that fight didn't happen?? (Well, personally, I've known brothers that fought all the damn time. Why these two couldn't do it and get paid for it is beyond me; but What the Hell do I know, anyway. )

So, yes....despite his competition. However, that factor will make it very hard to rank him in the list of ATG's, because others who came before him had more clearly defined parameters.



PS: I would favor Vitali over Wladimir.

Thank you for a serious and well-thought-out contribution.

Is the HW skill level really so bad these days? IMO the division looks 'weak' mainly due to the brothers superiority and that they make good fighters look limited. That said, I agree that it makes it hard to judge the true worth of the Klitschko's when they are so dominant. Too bad they can't go back in time and fight the past greats. As you hint yourself, it could have made for some great fights.

[JAB5239]

Their superior physical and athletic abilities, combined with great boxing skills and ring intelligence to excess.

Yet both were beat by smaller and lesser fighters in both Byrd and Brewster.

[bklynboy]

Not trying to be one of those "discreditors"; but facts are facts. This is, IMO, the weakest heavyweight division in decades. Not "weakest" in the terms of size nor strength; but of skill level. The Klitschko brothers are two shining stars swimming in murky waters. And that's sad for them.

But, maybe it's not fair to compare the talent in the division today to years past. Unfortunately, the only way to truly judge a fighter's worth is by the competition he fought. And, if the division's not that good and you're smoking everyone or dominating it completely, that makes it really hard to judge your worth.....other than you're doing what a "great" fighter should: beating the hell out of mediocre competition.

Personally, I think the Klitsckos would have fared well in ANY era in history; and maybe even dominated most based on the fact that they are skilled HUGE men. And, let's be honest. If you have a man that is as big as both Klitschkos are and put them in an era where all the other men are 50 LBs or more smaller......and not as skilled in some decades, THEY WILL DO WELL. A good big man vs a good little man favors the big man. A good big man vs a great smaller man means a tough night for the great smaller man; but doesn't necessarily guarantee victory for the giant. Follow?

To condense, yes, I think Vitali Klitsckho deserves to be remembered in years to come as an ATG based on the fact that he dominated the era in which he fought, just as Jack Johnson is remembered by those of us who care to look that far back in time for dominating the era in which he fought. Johnson's best competition came before he won the "World Heavyweight Championship". And while he is often criticized for not giving title shots to the best fighters of his era: Langford, McVey, and Jeannette, it is understandable when you examine the circumstances of the times. Besides, he'd fought and beaten both McVey and Jeannette more than 10 times each before winning the title. Only Langford really got shafted.

With Vitali, the only quality opponent of his era you can say with certainty he didn't face was.....Wladimir. Can anyone understand why that fight didn't happen?? (Well, personally, I've known brothers that fought all the damn time. Why these two couldn't do it and get paid for it is beyond me; but What the Hell do I know, anyway. )

So, yes....despite his competition. However, that factor will make it very hard to rank him in the list of ATG's, because others who came before him had more clearly defined parameters.



PS: I would favor Vitali over Wladimir.

Good post. I think that both Ks deserve credit for taking the sport seriously. It's a shame that they didn't have better competition, then we would see how talented they truly are. David Haye has skills and Wladimir had no problem with him. This says something. I can see both being in the TOP 20 but have a hard time placing them higher simply because aside from Vitali's fight with LL neither of them have faced any other TOP 20 fighters (or really even TOP 50 fighters).

Now is that fair to them? Aside from Tunney which TOP 20 fighter did Dempsey fight (and Tunney is more light heavy than heavy?) Which TOP 20 did Patterson fight and win? How about Holmes?

Stil

[Weltschmerz]

Yet both were beat by smaller and lesser fighters in both Byrd and Brewster.

Vitali wasn't 'beat' by Byrd

[JAB5239]

Vitali wasn't 'beat' by Byrd

Really? Because that's not what their records say.

[VG_Addict]

Thank you for a serious and well-thought-out contribution.

Is the HW skill level really so bad these days? IMO the division looks 'weak' mainly due to the brothers superiority and that they make good fighters look limited. That said, I agree that it makes it hard to judge the true worth of the Klitschko's when they are so dominant. Too bad they can't go back in time and fight the past greats. As you hint yourself, it could have made for some great fights.

The fact that a slow, clumsy plodder like Tyson Fury is a contender is PROOF that this division is terrible.

[Weltschmerz]

The fact that a slow, clumsy plodder like Tyson Fury is a contender is PROOF that this division is terrible.

I actually find Fury slightly underrated, he can go further, he's still young and improving fight by fight.

And the division is far from terrible, it has lots of contender talent in fighters such as Pulev, Helenius, Stiverne, Glazkov, Boytsov, Szpilka, Jennings, Wilder.