Can you be considered an ATG when these are your 10 best wins?

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE=r.burgundy;13645705]

he lost a fight he was dominating due to injury.thats not some clear controversial loss.and again,by the time he came back,byrd was just a part time fighter.he fought byrd again for the ibo belt,not because he wanted a rematch lol.duhh!!

But he DIDN'T. Dominate him and the punch stats prove this.

[r.burgundy]

[QUOTE=JAB5239;13646021]

But he DIDN'T. Dominate him and the punch stats prove this.

byrd might have won 1 round lol.and its not like these rounds are debateable.byrd even said after the fight "he was outboxing me a bit,but i was starting to come on"

[beez721]

[QUOTE=JAB5239;13646021]

But he DIDN'T. Dominate him and the punch stats prove this.

punch stats can be misleading when a fighters punches are just so much more powerful than the other as was the case here. I thought vitali was winning comfortably but byrds speed was giving vit some problems so I wouldnt call it total domination

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE=r.burgundy;13646553]

byrd might have won 1 round lol.and its not like these rounds are debateable.byrd even said after the fight "he was outboxing me a bit,but i was starting to come on"

Almost every round was close. Again, all you have to do is look at the punch stats. That is not dominating by any stretch. And you keep excusing the fact both were highly ranked the next several years.

And the rounds are most certainly debatable depending on what you favor, defense and ring generalship or aggression and harder punching.

[New England]

mr gorbachev, tear down this thread.

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE=beez721;13646589]

punch stats can be misleading when a fighters punches are just so much more powerful than the other as was the case here. I thought vitali was winning comfortably but byrds speed was giving vit some problems so I wouldnt call it total domination

Ok Vits punches were more powerful, but he never hurt Byrd and was being backed up nearly as much by a much smaller fighter. Either way he should have sought a rematch and it only could have improved his resume with a win.

[JAB5239]

mr gorbachev, tear down this thread.

Why, another will just replace it. There has been some good back and forth since I put the trolls who don't want to talk boxing but instead flame on ignore.

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE=JAB5239;13646604]

Ok Vits punches were more powerful, but he never hurt Byrd and was being backed up nearly as much by a much smaller fighter. Either way he should have sought a rematch and it only could have improved his resume with a win.

Sorry, thought I was responding r.burgundy.

[r.burgundy]

[QUOTE=JAB5239;13646590]

Almost every round was close. Again, all you have to do is look at the punch stats. That is not dominating by any stretch. And you keep excusing the fact both were highly ranked the next several years.

And the rounds are most certainly debatable depending on what you favor, defense and ring generalship or aggression and harder punching.

punch stats dont tell a good story in byrds case cause most of his punches are slaps.he had plenty rounds landing in single digits and not hardly throwing anything.that isnt defense and ring generalship
9.8 outta 10 general perfer aggression and hard punching lol,and the judges clearly favored aggression and hard punching
get it through your head that punch stats dont mean anything.all 3 judges had vit dominating the fight.end of story

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE]

punch stats dont tell a good story in byrds case cause most of his punches are slaps.

If most of his punches were slaps why was he able to back Vits up so often? And even if they were slaps, landing is scoring. Whitaker, Pep, Benitez, Rosenbloom and Locche are just a few of the names that come to mind that won fights without being hard punchers and using defensive skills more than most. It seems you want to penalize Byrd for being 8" shorter, 40 lighter and not being able to hit as hard.

he had plenty rounds landing in single digits and not hardly throwing anything.that isnt defense and ring generalship

Sorry, but this is just a plain ignorant thing to say since Vittles only landed 8 more punches the entire fight. Do the math, thats less than one more punch a round the entire fight. And defense and ring generalship are making a guy who is MUCH bigger than you miss more than he ever had before or since. Go ahead tell me I'm wrong about that.

9.8 outta 10 general perfer aggression and hard punching lol,and the judges clearly favored aggression and hard punching

Really? I sure would be interested to see where you dug that stat up from. Do you have a link or are you just blindly throwing that number out there? I favor aggression as well, but it isn't the end all in boxing.

get it through your head that punch stats dont mean anything.all 3 judges had vit dominating the fight.end of story

Get it through your head, winning close round does not mean you're dominating. And punch stats certainly tell more about a fight than the scorecards. Doesn't really matter though because I've actually watched the fight several times and had Vits up at the time of quittage either 7-2 or 6-3. With that said I also know the rounds were fairly close in many stanza's and Vittles in no way, shape or form dominated. It would seem the majority who have weighed in on this agree with me as well. And none of this changes the FACT that Byrd was highly ranked along side him and avenging his quit job would have undoubtedly helped his resume....which is and has been the point of this thread.