Vitali's mythical poor resume pt 2

[chav]

Yea, as long as getting stunned, punch drunk and KO'd means the same as getting tired of talking to a plaster wall.

And as long as facts are bias hating opinions from a clear complete idiot.

You're post is trash.

Don't fall under a truck whilst riding your motorbike. You are a valued member here and we would all miss you terribly.

[bklynboy]

Dude, are you serious? 180 lb Tunney?

You lost all neutral credibility you may have slightly have had now.

I'm not saying Tunney would have won. But he was a great boxer. If he came to this time he may have put on weight. Maybe not.

He was taller than Mike Tyson and was tailoring his style on beating Jack Dempsey. (The Mike Tyson of his era.) He was a master technician with excellent D, able to slip punches and counter them (think of Hopkins). Would VK or WK's size be an advantage? You bet it would. Does it mean that they would have an easy time taking out Tunney. I don't think so.

Tunney was a very smart man. If he felt he had to beef up to 205 to be able to survive the clinches then he would have. But I wouldn't be surprised to see the rope-a-dope in action here (even if Tunney didn't have the advantage of seeing Ali-Foreman).

Again, I'm not saying that Tunney would win. I'm definitely not saying he's favored to win - only that it would not be an easy fight. Tunney was a master technician and should not be discounted.

[Szef]

How can Haye be a clown and a big enough win to define Vitali as an ATG at the same time?

Muhammad Ali

Holmes, foreman, norton. Yes i think they would. But of course thats just my opinion.

What isn't an opinion is vitali's resume. Its poor.

Despite not having defeated any decent hwt, Vitali will get into the HOF.

Lets see if all you Klit lovers defend Deontay Wilder's trash resume and KO% in the future.

Wilder is now 29-0 and his best win is Liakovich's corpse. Vitali already was WBO champion and defeated Herbie Hide

[JAB5239]

Just for fun and because his resume has taken some flak on this forum lately I decided to show exactly why Vittles Klitschko's resume is very WEAK.

Randomly I picked out 3 names off of Joe Louis' resume as champion. I made sure to pick moderate names and not the best to better be able to prove my point that Vits resume stinks because the fighters he fought have proven very little against other top fighters.

Bob Pastor

Jimmy Bivins
Gus Lesnivich
Tami Mauriello
Billy Conn
Al McCoy
Gus Dorazio
Lee Ramage
Lou Nova

Tami Mauriello

Gus Lesnivich
Gunner Barlund
Bob Pastor
Red Burman
Jimmy Bivins
Lou Nova
Lee Savold

Cesar Brion

Lasrarza
Mauriello
Layne
Lowry

All fighters named were in the top 10 during, shortly before or shortly after fighting Louis.

All these fights against one another came within a couple of years before or after fighting Louis. They are proven commodities and that isn't even getting into the better fighters on Joes record.

Now...would anyone like to explain how Vits comp are proven commodities, or should we just call his resume good and him an ATG because you say so?

Edit: Louis wan't champion when he fought Brion. But you get the point.

[crold1]

Hmmm. Johnson was no. 8 in ring magazines year end rankings of 2002. In 2003 he beat Savarese before losing to Vitali so he was probably ranked.

Nope, I was right. In the Oct. 99 issue of Ring, through the ratings period of 6/13/99, the Heavy top ten was:

Lewis
Holy
Ibeabuchi
Grant
Tyson
Tua
Golota
Rahman
Byrd
Briggs

Klitschko ko'd Hide two weeks into the next ratings period. Hide unrated (as he should have been. The WBO belt at heavy meant NOTHING at that point and Hide's big win after the Bowe loss was the ancient Tony Tucker.

Fast forward to the April 2004 issue of Ring, ratings period through 12/03/2003. The top ten was:

Byrd
Sanders
Jones
Vitali
Toney
Tua
Rahman
Wlad
Oquendo
Tyson

Johnson...not rated. Makes sense. After he lost to Ruiz, he did nada while Oquendo got a little jobbed against Byrd, Jones beat Ruiz, and Toney beat Holy.

The following month, for beating a Kirk Johnson who came in a big breasted 260 (17 lbs. over his previous fight), Ring elevated Vitali to #1. Then they sanctioned Vitali-Sanders as a 1-3 fight for their belt. It was, in a word, manufactured. As hell. He hopped Sanders, who actually HAD a win over a top ten fighter in their current ratings (Wlad). Even more funny, one week after Johnson, John Ruiz (who had been top ten before Jones) beats Rahman, Ring's #7, and would go on to beat the rated Oquendo by KO before Klit-Sanders went down. Ruiz beat Johnson when he was rated too.

Clearly, actually beating guys in Ring's ratings was irrelevant where Vitali was concerned. It was the sort of machine move Ring used to RAIL on sanctioning bodies for making.

Vitali was NEVER lineal champion and I wrote about it at a site called Hardcore Boxing at the time. It was absurd. Like most people who want to argue him one of the top ten all time, Ring's move was based more on what might be than what was. When Vitali got hurt and kept postponing Rahman, his Ring belt was ultimately the biggest example people pointed to of Ring not being an answer. Their own staff at the time will say in retrospect it was not good for their credibility that it looked like a guess and then he couldn't go later.

[JAB5239]

"It's true that todays era of heavies are among the all-time weakest " -BattlingNelson

[crold1]

"It's true that todays era of heavies are among the all-time weakest " -BattlingNelson

The only era I would rate weaker is the period between Tunney and Louis

[JAB5239]

The only era I would rate weaker is the period between Tunney and Louis

The sharkey era, right?

[JAB5239]

"The opposition is so terrible" -BattlingNelson talking about Wlads ipposition.

If Wlads comp is that bad, how good is Vits?

[BennyST]

You are nitpicking by saying that Mercer was better when Wladimir himself destroyed him at a time when Vitali was killing the guys that knocked Wladimir out.

Yea Mercer was older but as you say, 40 is not that over the hill for a heavyweight dedicated to their craft.

Wladimir and Vitali would have beaten any version of him too.

This is one of the best examples of the complete delusion of some fans. A 40 year old former champ and top fighter, now a shot veteran loses and because you can find examples of some heavyweights at 40 still being reasonably good, Wladimir beat a still excellent version because Mercer should have still been good at 40.

He wasn't, and you yourself imply that, but because he should have been, and maybe could have been if he'd lived a Hopkinsesque lifestyle, Wlad should get props for beating a top version?

It's Mercers fault that Wlad beat an old, shot version. Mercer should have been younger, better, still going strong at 40. After all, Vitali could still beat guys at 40. That means Mercer was still good.



I've seen it all now.