-
-
Vitali Klitschko has a higher winning % than his brother... a higher ko%... higher rds scored in his favor... 3 time heavyweight champion... Wlad is a two time champ... Wlad knocked down 11 times.. Vitali 0..... Vitali is a higher caliber fighter & even more dominant. Head to head it's almost unanimous both at there best Wlad gets sparked.. yet the fighter with less weaknesses is the lesser fighter.... I've heard it all.Comment
-
I don't agree with this. I think the Wlad of the last few years has become a much more complete fighter than Vitali ever was. Since he learned to pace himself and fight a little more relaxed and confident, he's been a TOUGH out. He might stink it out sometimes, but his jab and right hand are two of the best weapons ever at Heavyweight. He has some setbacks Vitali doesn't, but he also has a much wider range of wins and has been matched tougher consistently through both their careers. The Wlad of the last few years beats the best of his brother from earlier in the decade IMO. Vitali is a good, not great, puncher (he's got a great KO% but a lot of those stops were from accumulation; he's nowhere near the puncher Wald is) and he doesn't present the same sort of style or speed issues that Sanders and Brewster did for his brother.Comment
-
He's definitely an atg hes just in a horrible era. I don't think he beats the likes of Louis Ali Frazier or Tyson. He's a a live dog against against Marciano, Patterson and Holmes. That's my opinion I'm not much for arguing its merit but the klitschkos do get a lot of unnecessary hate.Comment
-
Both Klitschkos would lay Patterson stone out. Quick. Marciano might hang around a little while (he might be hard to find with his bend over defense) but that's too much size to overcome. Of all the heavyweight champions pre-Liston, Louis is the only one I'd pick over both in any era. Dempsey might have a shot in his time given glove size and knockdown 'hovering' allowances.
We saw Louis against some guys close to the size of the K's, a couple who could fight. Marciano never really beat a good BIG man or even saw one.Comment
-
Wladimir Klitschko despite his dominance lately (Vitali has been just as dominant or more in the past decade) has much more vulnerabilities in the ring.. for starters.. not being able to withstand a strong punch eventually will lead to his downfall again.... all that is needed is a big guy with a strong punch that can't be held (Vitali is one of the few that would exploit this weakness)
Vitali is a great volume puncher.. difference between him & Wlad is that he'll punch his way out of jams to create his distance comfort... Wlad holds his way back into his comfort range. Wlad gets hit square on the jaw & he doesn't absorb a hard shot.. Vitali takes the shot & absorbs it as if nothing hit him.... look the name of the game is boxing.. if you can't take a shot you are more likely to lose when getting tagged.Comment
-
Speaking of resumes a lot of you knowledgeable posters like to pick on Vitali's lack of quality opposition as if he's Deontay Wilder with a paper belt... Vitali started out just like him but attained a belt while knocking everyone out without getting knocked down like Wilder has... Vitali is a three time heavyweight champion.. only Holyfield & Ali have achieved this.... you talk about resume as if he hasn't accomplished greatness when he most certainly... the guy loses less rds than Mayweather for a reason... his entire opposition has been left thoroughly inept... not one judge has ever given his opponent more than 2 rds no matter the duration of the fight win or lose.Comment
-
The WBO belt at heavyweight? Their champions had varying levels of credibility in different divisions over the years but were laughable as serious claimants until the mid-2000s in the top class; look how many guys just chucked that belt in the trash. Mercer, Bowe, Moorer, Akinwande, and even Sanders all chucked it to get shots at better regarded titles. Most people forget Bowe ever held it. I've seen Bowe say "two-time champ" and see people just sort of roll their eyes. It had no real value at the top of the class and was LIGHTLY regarded in 1999 and he won it from a guy almost no one saw as a top ten heavy at the time. While he didn't get his first belt out of a garbage can the way Lewis did, Lewis at least knocked out a Ruddock in everyone's top four at the time to set that up. And at the time Vit beat Hide, Lewis was the CLEAR legitmate champion.
Context matters here. Off the win over Hide, Klitschko broke into Ring's top ten for the first time and he didn't hold the belt long enough to give it any value.
Totally agree on Wilder. he's faced nada. Has an interesting package of potential (if he can take a shot and go rounds, two verdicts still WAY out from being proven). That's it. He's a 30 fight prospect.
Vit's 3 is hardly what Ali did (still the only three-time lineal champ even if the third came because he was so faded he could actually lose to Spinks) or Holyfield (actually had four; two lineal, two non). Holyfield's fourth, on the heels of losing to Lewis, was a joke. Beating Herbie Hide in the middle of the two Lewis-Holy scraps and calling that being Heavyweight champ is just as big a joke.
He's won two WBC belts without ever proving to be THE champion.
The first was the closest, as most regarded him best in class but Sanders was his first real-time win over a legit rated guy. His second WBC belt came against a guy with NO claim to the real crown (he might have beat Peter easier than Wlad did in his first go at Peter, but Peter's loss to Wlad left his WBC claim meaningless). That's closer to Tim Witherspoon (won two belts while there was a legit lineal champ reigning) but with a long reign in his second WBC string that Spoon never put together.
And if Vit is "3-time" in any significant way, than is Michael Moorer too? He won WBO, THE title, and then the vacant IBF from a Schultz who got straight ROBBED against Foreman for the lineal crown. Technically, he's 3-time too. No one takes that very serious.
He's not unaccomplished. But with challengers like Charr, Solis, a shell of Briggs (who was never that great in his prime), Sosnowski, Arreola (STILL has never beaten a real top ten guy) and Johnson, we're not talking about an epic reign either. His "entire opposition has been left thoroughly inept." But too many of them have been thoroughly inept.Last edited by crold1; 09-27-2013, 10:10 PM.Comment
-
You beat him if his body breaks down during a match... no one has ever been winning against him while action was taking place.. He's had 47 fights & not one fighter has ever beaten him to the punch... that speaks volumes as to what blueprint there actually is. Vitali Klitschko is the only heavyweight champion never to have faced the same fighter twice.. when no one can knock you down with a punch.. no one can win more than 2 rds... who would want to face such a fighter when there's no chance that you'll even throw more punches than him.Comment
Tweet
Comment