Vitali's mythical poor resume pt 2

[Grimmer]

It's hard to quantify sometimes but, as I said, I think there are things he could have done to make a better case. Not one unification fight ever, given the era, is pretty rough

Which is why even a top 20 ranking is too high. You have to be judged on what you achieved, not what you could achieve.

The fact is even if people regard a Vitali as a top 20 now he will not survive the test of time. History will not be kind to him at all given the quality of his record.

[LacedUp]

Stop thinking you know something about lacedup.

How do your know he hasn't been following boxing since the 70s?

I will happily admit that I started watching boxing in coordination with my amateur career in the early-mid 90's. I don't feel the need to big up my knowledge by lying about my age or how long i've followed the sport.

I will happily admit that many other posters here know more about boxing history than I do, but I know enough to talk with anyone about fights that's happened in the last 20 odd years.

[BattlingNelson]

It's hard to quantify sometimes but, as I said, I think there are things he could have done to make a better case. Not one unification fight ever, given the era, is pretty rough

Yeah, but then again. His brother held all the belts except WBA and Vitali tried but couldn't get Valuev or Haye in the ring. It takes two to tango.

[JAB5239]

Looks like something we saw earlier in this thread. Now just from the other side.

Except I did the research and there was nothing to be found. You did to but couldn't stop crying, so I gave you a lollipop.

[crold1]

Yeah, but then again. His brother held all the belts except WBA and Vitali tried but couldn't get Valuev or Haye in the ring. It takes two to tango.

Right, but results matter. Wlad has more and has been consistently, going back to early on, been matched tougher. He lost some but came out the better in the end.

[bklynboy]

You think and that's my point.

Thinking is not a fact, so stop treating it like it is.

It not so because I think it's so. But are you saying that it is impossible to judge fighters?

I think it is clear that Roy Jones was not as good a boxer lwhen he was in his 40s than before the Tarver fights. I think it is also clear that Muhammad Ali, when he fought Larry Holmes, was not as good a boxer as when he first fought Sonny Liston.

There are few facts in boxing aside from who, when and where. But if we can't state the above two points without having it referred to as opinion (which it is) then what kind of discussion can we have about anything related to boxing?

There's lot of pure speculation out there. I think VK would have beaten LL if not for the cuts. That is speculation. One can argue that LL was coming back and would have won with or without the cut; that 6 rounds does not make a fight. But saying that Roy Jones was better in the late 1990s than he was last year (while technically nothing more than speculation) I think approaches the level of agreed-upon-fact.

[crold1]

Which is why even a top 20 ranking is too high. You have to be judged on what you achieved, not what you could achieve.

The fact is even if people regard a Vitali as a top 20 now he will not survive the test of time. History will not be kind to him at all given the quality of his record.

I can't ignore matchup issues. No way guys like Corbett, Tunney, Walcott, beat Vitali. I think both Ks beat most of the legit Heavy champs pre-Liston, minus Louis who I think beats both.

[BattlingNelson]

Except I did the research and there was nothing to be found. You did to but couldn't stop crying, so I gave you a lollipop.

You know a lot about boxing. I'm truely sad that you are now just a petty troll. Now stay off my back and discuss things with Weltschmuckz. You and him are made for each other.

[JAB5239]

Yeah. As if it was on you proving another posters postulate wrong.

Either one backs up the claim made or STFU. Like jab did.

Lol, such a tough guy now but couldn't stop crying before!

[BattlingNelson]

Right, but results matter. Wlad has more and has been consistently, going back to early on, been matched tougher. He lost some but came out the better in the end.

No question Wlad will be ranked higher. I think he gets somewhat underappreciated today like most Champions have been by their contemporaries. When he retires there is likely to be a void that takes time to fill. In twenty years I wouldn't be surprised if Wlad's consensus ranking is top 10.