Peak Ali vs Peak Vitali Klitschko

cowzerp

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

cowzerp, are you saying that progress in Science, nutrition plus rest and recover technology plays a big part in determining the outcome of a fight like this? You posts tend to reflect this IMO.)

not necessarily, vitali with his skills wins this fight either way to me, his tools and great use of them is just too hard to beat for Ali who is the greatest by the way!

The advancement in scientific knowledge of course improves size, fitness and other physical attributes. But skill and technique rule in the world of boxing so I do believe boxers like Ali would be champs today, it's vitali is special is my point in this thread.

corny

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

cowzerp, are you saying that progress in Science, nutrition plus rest and recover technology plays a big part in determining the outcome of a fight like this?

Of course it does and there's nothing preposterous in that line of thinking.

Its the way of the world. Each generation improves on the past and why should boxing be any different? Its not only preparation and nutrition either. Innovative people have come and gone in the 40 years since Ali and it would be foolish to believe they didn't leave some sort of legacy in improvements to technical ability.

Nice quote from Isaac Newton "If i have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants". Vitalis the man seeing farthest at present!:)

sxt

Progress in science that helps you get stronger and faster, and enables you to perform better helps alot! Pele or George Best were the greatest footballers in their era, how would they cope in the game today?

Ali was 212 ilbs for his last couple of fights in the 60's , 35-40 ilbs is a massive difference if that opponent is a lean, well conditioned atheltic type, with immense boxing skills designed and developed to clinically win every round with an Iron Fist!

walshb

But guys, you are basing all this on TWO men who happen to be freaks of nature with size and skill. The rest of the HW fighters today would have no chance whatsoever of making it in the 60s or 70s. Vit and Wlad are capable of making it in any era, future eras too.

As for the size. Well, HW men in the 60s and 70s were 6 feet and above, and 200 plus lbs. Today, it is not that the men are bigger, they are fatter. There is a difference. Coming in fat and out of shape is not the same as being naturally bigger.

Now, men like Bowe and Lewis are a different argument. These guys were big and talented men, just like the Klits.

I still think that from all the sports, boxing has progressed the least, and looking at today's champs, it has regressed, not progressed. Todays men, in general, don't beat men from 20 years ago, 30 years ago, 40 years ago etc.

RXMPS

If a prime Vitali could not take out the heaviest and oldest version of Lewis how he should have done better against the prime version of Lewis (Golota, Rahman II etc.)?

Vitali could not use his unique chance against a mentally already retired champ and Lennox punished him for that.

Lewis was 38 and took the fight on 11 days notice because kirk johnson pulled out, also he was 4 pounds over fighting weight but that was 4 pounds over his heaviest fighting weight ever up until that point. Any boxing fan knows that's a sign of fading.

So lets look at the result Lewis had one cut!! and yes slumped in his corner at one point but Vitali had 5 cuts one alone needing 60 stiches and plastic surgery and could’nt by the look of it find his corner at one point

So after 6 rounds Lewis at his heaviest and oldest and most battle worn inflicted so much damage on Vitali that no one could say that fight shouldn't of been stopped.If that fight had of went one more round the damage done to Vitali's eye would meant he would have never fought again.

Has an old champion ever beaten the future young champion to be that dominated for nearly a decade?

I have never heard of it.

Vitali is very underrated I agee.

Everyone talks about Tyson's and Foreman's fear factor, but Vitali is even more feared imo, he is a very very intimidating man.Most of the fellows he has fought threw there game plans out the window when they faced him in the ring and felt his power.The one's that had no fear like Sanders, Lewis, Byrd to an extent proved he wasn't unstoppable.

A tough fight for sure

The difference being Ali won his toughest fights and Klitschko lost his toughest fights.

Ali can finish a fight with a broken jaw - Klit will stay on his stool with a sore arm.

More interesting one would have been Ali vs Lewis.

My verdict.

Vitali would win, I think it's a terrible match up for Ali, he didn't have the power to hurt Vitali imo, a man that has never been knocked down.He would be well beat by Vitali.

Only heavies that I see beating Vitali are a prime Lewis, a prime Tyson, prime Foreman.

But I see Ali beating a prime Tyson, a prime Foreman and then losing to a prime Vitali and prime Lewis.

Then I see Lewis, losing to a prime Tyson and prime Foreman.

I'm confused.

walshb

I'm not confused. Styles make fights, and I am like you, I would back aggressive and heavy hitting great fighters to beat Vitali. Tyson and Foreman being two. Lewis I also back to beat Vitali more often than not. When one looks at their fight, Lewis clearly not at peak, it is obvious that it was nip and tuck. A prime Lewis had more speed, better feet, better stamina and was even more aggressive. He beats Vit 7/8 from 10.

sxt

RXMPS wrote: »

If a prime Vitali could not take out the heaviest and oldest version of Lewis how he should have done better against the prime version of Lewis (Golota, Rahman II etc.)?

The Rahman II fight was only a year and a half after this match remember , he definitely was the oldest version but not the heaviest,definitely not in his best ever shape, but not far off his prime in my opinion

Vitali could not use his unique chance against a mentally already retired champ and Lennox punished him for that.

Lennox was scheduled to fight Vitali in December of that year

Lewis was 38 and took the fight on 11 days notice because kirk johnson pulled out, also he was 4 pounds over fighting weight but that was 4 pounds over his heaviest fighting weight ever up until that point. Any boxing fan knows that's a sign of fading.

Vitali took the fight on 11 days notice also, as he was on the undercard for that same event.

So lets look at the result Lewis had one cut!! and yes slumped in his corner at one point but Vitali had 5 cuts one alone needing 60 stiches and plastic surgery and could’nt by the look of it find his corner at one point

The freakish cut/ open wound in the third round and was getting worse and worse as the fight went on . It needed 120 internal stiches and the fight had to be stopped to save his eye no doubts about it.


So after 6 rounds Lewis at his heaviest and oldest and most battle worn inflicted so much damage on Vitali that no one could say that fight shouldn't of been stopped.If that fight had of went one more round the damage done to Vitali's eye would meant he would have never fought again.

Vitali dominated the first two rounds , he got a pretty serious eye wound in the third round and would have had great difficulty in seeing from then on in .Vitali was still two rounds ahead at the end of the fight on the cards on all three Judges. Lennox declined a rematch

Has an old champion ever beaten the future young champion to be that dominated for nearly a decade?

I have never heard of it.

Vitali is very underrated I agee.

.

I have no idea how to quote properly so did it this way

Spazdarn

walshb wrote: »

But guys, you are basing all this on TWO men who happen to be freaks of nature with size and skill. The rest of the HW fighters today would have no chance whatsoever of making it in the 60s or 70s. Vit and Wlad are capable of making it in any era, future eras too.

As for the size. Well, HW men in the 60s and 70s were 6 feet and above, and 200 plus lbs. Today, it is not that the men are bigger, they are fatter. There is a difference. Coming in fat and out of shape is not the same as being naturally bigger.

Now, men like Bowe and Lewis are a different argument. These guys were big and talented men, just like the Klits.

I still think that from all the sports, boxing has progressed the least, and looking at today's champs, it has regressed, not progressed. Todays men, in general, don't beat men from 20 years ago, 30 years ago, 40 years ago etc.

I don't really think the sport has regressed, it's the way the fighters are managed that's left us with weak champions, if the politics, the TV and the promoters weren't as big of a factor then, a lot of the paper champions would have lost their crown by now.

Another thing not mentioned is the use of performance enhancing drugs is stamped out a lot more now, when back then I'd isay it is safe to say it was far easier to get away with it.

RiseToTheTop

sxt wrote: »

Progress in science that helps you get stronger and faster, and enables you to perform better helps alot! Pele or George Best were the greatest footballers in their era, how would they cope in the game today?

Ali was 212 ilbs for his last couple of fights in the 60's , 35-40 ilbs is a massive difference if that opponent is a lean, well conditioned atheltic type, with immense boxing skills designed and developed to clinically win every round with an Iron Fist!

Yes, Ali was 212 and completely ripped. Klitschko was 247.5lbs against Solis, but came down to 242lbs against Adamek. Plus Klitschko never weighed in as heavy as 252lbs. Like I said above, he was 242lbs against Adamek. Look at this pic where he is 247lbs:

http://answers.bettor.com/images/Articles/thumbs/extralarge/Vitali-Klitschko-to-face-Odlanier-Solis-in-Germany,-Boxing-news-94956.jpg

He is not extremely ripped. Plus i'm looking at his boxrec and from the years around the mid-late 90's Vitali was weighing around 232lbs-238lbs. That was when he was 25-29 years of age, a fully built man.

If Vitali was to get completely ripped, as Ali was at 212 he would come in at under 240lbs IMO.

Getting back to the fight itself, how do you think Vitali would deal with Ali's speed? Could Vitali corner Ali and put him up against the ropes?

RiseToTheTop

BTW, not to you guys specifically, but on youtube and other boxing forums. I don't like when Lewis gets enough credit for his fight with Vitali.

There was a reason Vitali looked like what he did at the end of the fight!!

cowzerp

Getting in close to Vitali to use the speed without getting tagged is the hard bit, I would as how would Ali do that, been fast does not guarantee you can get in and land, I'd definitely say a fighter like Tyson or Evander who would get on very close have the best chance of ruining vitali's style

or someone like Lewis who has similar attributes. I think people forget that Lewis was probably peak in his last few years and was quite a nervous fighter when younger, take cuts out and I think Vitali beats Lewis every time, Lewis knew that too and avoided rematch as he knew he was going to lose 1st time out.

cowzerp

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

BTW, not to you guys specifically, but on youtube and other boxing forums. I don't like when Lewis gets enough credit for his fight with Vitali.

There was a reason Vitali looked like what he did at the end of the fight!!

Yes he got hit plenty by a big man, he hit back more and Lewis was fading bad-Lewis came out of that fight with respect even though most felt Vitali was the true winner, the boo's in the crowd told ya that.

walshb

sxt wrote: »

I have no idea how to quote properly so did it this way

Did you error when you mentioned the Rahman II match was 18 months "after" the Vit match? Rahman II was 19 months before the Vit match.

Lewis did not look close to prime in 2003 when he met Vitali. Wasn't a shell, but he looked quite slow and ponderous. More so than i the mid to late 90s.

RiseToTheTop

cowzerp wrote: »

Getting in close to Vitali to use the speed without getting tagged is the hard bit, I would as how would Ali do that, been fast does not guarantee you can get in and land, I'd definitely say a fighter like Tyson or Evander who would get on very close have the best chance of ruining vitali's style

or someone like Lewis who has similar attributes. I think people forget that Lewis was probably peak in his last few years and was quite a nervous fighter when younger, take cuts out and I think Vitali beats Lewis every time, Lewis knew that too and avoided rematch as he knew he was going to lose 1st time out.

Well there reach is the same, IMO Vitali would have a lot more trouble landing on Ali.

cowzerp

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

Well there reach is the same, IMO Vitali would have a lot more trouble landing on Ali.

Reach between the same is too simplistic, Ali has to reach further to hit Vitali who is 6'8.5" and Ali's head height is closer to Vitali's arms/shoulders due to him been 6,3"

Vitali Is not slow either and as fast as others who beat Ali and more skillfull than any of them.

RiseToTheTop

Vitali ain't 6'8.5, look at him next to 5.10 Tyson:

walshb

Not sure what Vit's height is, but I think it's safe to assume he is at lest 3 inches taller than Ali. Reach measurements are not to be taken too seriously, especially when there is also a noticeable height difference. Same height, then it's a good measurement to use and compare.

BTW, in the photos Vit looks at least 6 inches taller than Mike.

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

Not sure what Vit's height is, but I think it's safe to assume he is at lest 3 inches taller than Ali. Reach measurements are not to be taken too seriously, especially when there is also a noticeable height difference. Same height, then it's a good measurement to use and compare.

BTW, in the photos Vit looks at least 6 inches taller than Mike.

Mike was 5,11" not 5,10", it's on box rec he is 6,7.5" either way he is a big dude and 3-4 inches taller than Ali.

RiseToTheTop

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LY6lSnnlGQ

Go to 3:21 of this video, it is Wladimir on BBC Breakfast. He says he is 6'5.

Look at the photo at the top of the article here, they look the same height. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/magazine/specials/sportsman/2009/11/23/klitschkos.sportsman/index.html

That is why I am confused.

walshb

A lot of the time a fighter's height will be exaggerted. I know Gerry Cooney is listed as 6 feet 6/7 inches I think. Now, next to Foreman, who is usually listed as 6 feet 3 inches, there seemd to be no height difference, or at least not 3-4 inches difference. Wlad and Vit are going to be 3 inches taller than Ali. I think this is a fair description. It's a difference that cannot be ignored when matching them. It should be a factor in this fight.

Can anyone say there was 2-3 inches in height when looking at LL and Vit in the ring? I seem to recall both me being almost the same height, maybe an inch difference in Vit's favour.

RiseToTheTop

There is never 5.5 inches difference between Ali and Vitali.

walshb

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

There is never 5.5 inches difference between Ali and Vitali.

I agree.

sxt

Someone said it on a different thread .There are some people that are talking about the Klits that could not tell the difference between the brothers !

sxt

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

There is never 5.5 inches difference between Ali and Vitali.

Yeah just 5 inches of height , 30 ilbs of muscle , someone much stronger , more powerful , with much better boxing technique, and oh, a brilliant chin!

RiseToTheTop

Where do you come up with all these "better boxing technique" crap???

5 inches of height??? Jesus ****ing Christ.

walshb

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

Where do you come up with all these "better boxing technique" crap???
.

Agree

That to me is odd. I don't get it. I have watched men today, and watched the heavies from the 70s? Where is this better technique?

And, even with the Klits, where is it?

Massive size with talent to use that size. Ok, I agree here, but where is the better technique?

Oh, and not just "better technique," "much better technique." What??

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

Agree

That to me is odd. I don't get it. I have watched men today, and watched the heavies from the 70s? Where is this better technique?

And, even with the Klits, where is it?

Massive size with talent to use that size. Ok, I agree here, but where is the better technique?

Oh, and not just "better technique," "much better technique." What??

I think he is talking about doing the basics right, Vitali certainly does the simple stuff better than George did-George is more of a brawler and if he was not such a monster would not win much at all

As you know George is 1 of my favourite fighters ever, but technician he was not, 2nd part of his career he was more so.

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

I think he is talking about doing the basics right, Vitali certainly does the simple stuff better than George did-George is more of a brawler and if he was not such a monster would not win much at all

As you know George is 1 of my favourite fighters ever, but technician he was not, 2nd part of his career he was more so.

But I think he's applying it across the board. To the whole lot. Yes, one could pick out a man here and there in either era and say this.

BTW, I believe his reference was in relation to Ali and Klit. No way, no way. Technique is subjective. I would pick Ali as a far better technician in every sense, and a better athlete too in comparison to the Klits.

The Klits are quite stiff and robotic in their approach, position and movement. Formean to me looks a lot looser and fluid; and as for technique, what is this "much better" reference. Overall, George's boxing technique is as good as any man today at HW. Prime Foreman and past it Foreman.

Reread his post #55: Yes, he is saying that the Klits have a "much better" boxing technique than Muhammad Ali. I don't know. I'm flummoxed!

cowzerp

Only way i can see him meaning that and possibly agree is if he is looking at it from an olympic Boxing boxing point of view, On computers then Vitali would be more suited.

In Pro Boxing i would disagree but they where both elite at using their physical attributes.

sxt

walshb wrote: »

But I think he's applying it across the board. To the whole lot. Yes, one could pick out a man here and there in either era and say this.

BTW, I believe his reference was in relation to Ali and Klit. No way, no way. Technique is subjective. I would pick Ali as a far better technician in every sense, and a better athlete too in comparison to the Klits.

The Klits are quite stiff and robotic in their approach, position and movement. Formean to me looks a lot looser and fluid; and as for technique, what is this "much better" reference. Overall, George's boxing technique is as good as any man today at HW. Prime Foreman and past it Foreman.

Reread his post #55: Yes, he is saying that the Klits have a "much better" boxing technique than Muhammad Ali. I don't know. I'm flummoxed!

The ability to control and dominate, every opponent you ever fight , not get hit often , rarely loose rounds ever , and systematically breaking down and easily stopping nearly every boxer you face with clinical and accurate punches, involves having a pretty good boxing technique

The technique of boxers from the 70's are alot different to the klits , alot of the fighters back then were brawlers , or just slug it out to the end fighters

The klits could slug it out but it leaves the result somewhat up in the air...


Ali vs Foreman or frazier could have gone either way