Vitali's mythical poor resume pt 2

[BattlingNelson]

It was a case of circumstances. While he beat some guys, they weren't more impressive than Sanders win over Wlad or Oquendo's disputed loss against Byrd. Both those men came in the ratings off that. That's two slots, plus the shaking down of Wlad. You could make a case he was JUST outside. He wasn't in though and, at 260, was hardly an impressive win to justify a 4 to 1 move...unless you REALLY wanted to crown a new champ.

I think Ring was making a down payment philosophically that Vitali would validate their move. He didn't. It hurt their credibility as many in the press (including myself and others) pointed to it as one (of several) of the flaws in what they were doing. The advisory ratings panel, which still exists with different members under the new editorial and its loosening of the rules to the point that Canelo-Trout, a 2-3 fight, could be recognized by the mag (uugh), largely grew out of those criticisms.

I should say first and foremost, that the list of top 10 opponents faced by Vitali is not my compilation. I was just curious about Johnson.

What we need is the ring rankings of the months following the may 2003 issue. You quote the issue of April 2004 where he was not ranked, which makes sense after being KO'ed by Klit. Do you have the issue pre their fight in December? That would be the one we are looking for. I don't have it.

[crold1]

Yeah pre Louis was bad. So was pre Tyson era. marciano's era wasn't terrific either.

And of course the era of today.

Marcaino's had some faded guys but they could still go. It was undersized more than bad. Now, what the division was left with until Liston really rose to prominence...rough.

Pre-Tyson had problems with activity level, politics, and sometimes conditioning but, athletically, the fighters were pretty good. Some were really good. And often (I've been watching a bunch of them lately for some research), the fights were awesome. Coetzee was in some corkers. That dude was fun. Dokes, Witherspoon, and Thomas were all very talented guys.

Also underrated is the first half of the 2000s. That was a pretty fun time. It's been the last few years that were rough, with things getting better gradually. The Klits have done great. The rest of the class has been way up and down. And the fight quality has been really inconsistent. There hasn't been a GREAT Heavyweight fight since Brewster-Liakhovich.

[crold1]

I should say first and foremost, that the list of top 10 opponents faced by Vitali is not my compilation. I was just curious about Johnson.

What we need is the ring rankings of the months following the may 2003 issue. You quote the issue of April 2004 where he was not ranked, which makes sense after being KO'ed by Klit. Do you have the issue pre their fight in December? That would be the one we are looking for. I don't have it.

That's the one I used. The issue I quote immediately precedes the Johnson fight. It's why I gave the dates inside the issue (i.e. ratings through date...). He was out before Vitali. Vitali was fourth that issue...then he moved to one. remember, cover dates are ahead of real time by a few months. Gap has narrowed in recent years, but still a lag.

[BattlingNelson]

That's the one I used. The issue I quote immediately precedes the Johnson fight. It's why I gave the dates inside the issue (i.e. ratings through date...). He was out before Vitali. Vitali was fourth that issue...then he moved to one. remember, cover dates are ahead of real time by a few months. Gap has narrowed in recent years, but still a lag.

I see. Thanks.

There's also the Jones-Ruiz fight. That should cover an eventual remaining spot of Johnson's downfall that hasn't been covered. (Unless the f up the cover dates and real dates.)

Looks like he was no. 11. lol

[crold1]

I see. Thanks.

There's also the Jones-Ruiz fight. That should cover an eventual remaining spot of Johnson's downfall that hasn't been covered. (Unless the f up the cover dates and real dates.)

Looks like he was no. 11. lol

More like 12. Ruiz slipped all the way out of the top ten after Jones but assume him ahead of Johnson; came back after he beat Rahman and rose more after Oquendo. Not saying he ever beats Vit (no way), it's funny that Ruiz (who had already had wins over top ten Holy and Johnson) picked up two MORE wins over currently rated Ring contenders before Vitali got his first.

Again, it looked very manipulated and not based on wins which should be the first barometer.

[Ogecca MaMa]

why TS is hiding? klitscjkos' team "fans" sure got owned again..

[Boxing Goat]

I was on RING's panel for years. ESPN doesn't have a panel.

Here's the BoxRec list of LINEAL Heavyweight Champions...who's missing:

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Wo...eight_Champion

Here's CBZ's, still the best histoical website for boxing online:

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/achamp.htm

I don't need you to give me a link to Ring champs. That is, again, a fact. It is also a fact that Ring has not always been a good source for lineage since they started handing out belts again. I would argue, as many have and did, that they were wrong to go with a 1-3 fight in that case, especially when 1 had never beaten a single fighter rated in their top ten at the time he beat them.

Vitali was never the lineal champ. Ring just wanted him to be.

Did you not read the rules that I pointed out to you?

Do you really adamantly want Vitali to have never have been the champ that damn bad dude?

Who are you and what's your damn problem? That's just sad.

Take a look at what I've sent you and look at the picture in my signature with Vitali wearing the Ring title he took home after beating Corrie Sanders.

Ring title = Lineal champ. Period.

Vitali was the one and only champ when Lewis retired based on the Ring rules. He lost that due to retirement, but that's the only reason.

The fact that you even attempt to dispute clearly displays what you are about.

Now, write back if you want but I refuse to keep trying to convince such a narrow minded moron.

[Boxing Goat]

Arreola is obviously a terrible example. He doesn't have the genetics to look like an Adonis in the first place. He was actually 'in shape' for his last fight with Mitchell



This as good looking physique you'll get with Cristobal.

Neither did the 2nd coming of Foreman. Not only that, Arreola has no stamina issues at all so it really doesn't matter.

Anything to discredit the Klitschko brothers era is par for the course.

I would gaurantee that Arreola would have mopped the floor with Chuck Wepner and numerous contenders that got a shot at Ali's title, but that goes ignored.

[crold1]

Did you not read the rules that I pointed out to you?

Do you really adamantly want Vitali to have never have been the champ that damn bad dude?

Who are you and what's your damn problem? That's just sad.

Take a look at what I've sent you and look at the picture in my signature with Vitali wearing the Ring title he took home after beating Corrie Sanders.

Ring title = Lineal champ. Period.

Vitali was the one and only champ when Lewis retired based on the Ring rules. He lost that due to retirement, but that's the only reason.

The fact that you even attempt to dispute clearly displays what you are about.

Now, write back if you want but I refuse to keep trying to convince such a narrow minded moron.

Why are you getting all huffy? You're not entitled to your own facts regardless of your opinion. It's a fact he was Ring champ. No dispute there. Ring Champ, since they started handing out belts again, did not always equal lineal champ and this was a case worthy of real dispute. I've given examples. I've also provided the facts as to how Vitali rose to #1 without beating anyone currently rated by Ring prior to Sanders. If all you have in response is ad hominem attacks, well then that's all you have.

I have nothing against Vitali. It's just the way it lays out.

Here's part of a piece I wrote on it a few years back:

http://www.maxboxing.com/Cliff/Rold040908.asp

What About Ring?

Fans used to hearing more frequently about ‘real’ World champions on HBO and ESPN in recent years may be wondering why the lineages noted above don’t entirely line up with Ring Magazine since Ring is often the standard used by those media giants. That’s simple.

When Ring decided to start naming champions again, they elected to ignore some established history, including their own.

That’s a problem when considering that their policy is supposed to be about the notion that titles are won, and lost, only in the ring. In other words, Ring looks like it is all about restoring lineage to titles but, if there was an election that said they could just call a do-over on history, I missed it. While Ring left the game of tracing ‘the man who beat the man’ or at least the ‘man who became the man’ in the late 80’s, websites like the Cyber Boxing Zone (CBZ), and the magazine Boxing Illustrated well into the 90s, were still protecting Boxing’s history.

So, with renewed discussion at this site, and around the sport, about the merits of Ring’s championships, it’s time to take another look at how things have played out on this front. Loyal readers will find this subject old territory for me, but MaxBoxing readers not as familiar with my work can quickly be caught up on the specifics.

When Ring began recognizing champions again, sans alphabelts, earlier this decade, they did so by declaring, among others, the titles at 108, 112, 115, and 126 lbs. vacant and recognizing Roy Jones as Light Heavyweight champion. Jones was easy for most people to swallow because he was, well, Roy. However, his ‘undisputed’ title reign was built on sanctioning body recognition, stripped alphabelts, and occasionally top foes. They ignored the history passed from Hill to Dariusz Michalczewski.

They reasoned, paraphrasing, that the other divisions were in disarray and it would be too confusing to retroactively trace the lines so vacant won. Was that really the case? Well, let’s say it wouldn’t have taken much looking to be un-confused.

If any of you have the February 2008 issue of Ring handy, open it up to page 128 and you’ll see that Sot Chitalada and Barry McGuigan were, correctly, recognized as World champs at Flyweight and Featherweight respectively in March 1986. Those lines never broke, and they traced back farther than ’86. When Ring started noting champs again between 2001 and 2002, that would have meant Wonjongkam and Naseem Hamed.

Since becoming a recognizer of championships again, other problems have arisen with Ring. Among them are:

• Crowning Rosendo Alvarez at 108 while the lineage ran through Jorge Arce in a straight line from Michael Carbajal-Humberto Gonzalez;
• Ignoring the lineage at 115 lbs. that belonged to Masamori Tokuyama in a straight line to the Jiro Watanabe-Payao Poontarat fight in 1984;
• Crowning Paulie Ayala at 122 lbs. for his one clear win over Bones Adams in 2002 after three arguably bad decisions in a row for Ayala against Hugo Dianzo, Johnny Tapia and Bones Adams and with no other wins in the division. Ayala never defended his hollow crown; and let us not forget…
• The coronation of big brother Vitali Klitschko as Heavyweight champion for his first win over a currently rated Ring top ten fighter, ever, against Corrie Sanders in 2004. Much as he was loathsome to watch, John Ruiz’s rebound from the Roy Jones loss with wins over Hasim Rahman and Fres Oquendo were more meritorious than anything Klitscko had actually finished when he entered the ring with Sanders.

To their credit, they have been on the ball on other occasions. Their recognizing Jose Luis Castillo-Juan Lazcano as being for the then-vacant Lightweight title in 2004 appeared correct and was validated by an excellent series of fights that culminated in Castillo-Corrales I. Evidenced above, most of their titlists are accurate to date, so it's not as if they're way out of the ballpark there even if they did back into history rather than embracing it. Finally, through much of modern Boxing’s rich and unique history, Ring’s belts have been a constant from old pictures of Nat Fleischer and Ray Robinson to the casket of Apollo Creed. When a fighter proves to be his divisions true champion, having that belt there is a bonus and a cool aesthetic. But…

This Ring review is inspired in large part by Steve Kim’s piece here at Maxboxing on Monday. Steve and I don’t approach this issue from the same direction or even reach all the same conclusions, but for those like Steve who might feel no obligation to recognize Bernard Hopkins or Joel Casamayor as sole champions, Ring provides the role model. After all, if Ring can decide that legitimate lineage is discardable, then why can’t their placebo lineage at 175 or decision to recognize the weight-skewed Casamayor-Corrales III also be discarded by knowledgeable boxing people based on the results unfolding before them?

[bklynboy]

Neither did the 2nd coming of Foreman. Not only that, Arreola has no stamina issues at all so it really doesn't matter.

Anything to discredit the Klitschko brothers era is par for the course.

I would gaurantee that Arreola would have mopped the floor with Chuck Wepner and numerous contenders that got a shot at Ali's title, but that goes ignored.

Yes. I can see Arreola beating Wepner but Ali's resume is not based on Wepner, Leon Spinks, and Joe Bugner. He faced, and beat, some pretty damn good fighters. Need I mention them? Liston. Patterson. Frazier. Foreman. and his second tier fighters were also pretty good (Norton, Cleveland Williams, Ernie Terrell, among others)

I don't disparage either VK or WK but they have the misfortune of fighting in a poor era.