Vitali Klitschko,the Greatest Heavyweight Champion of all Time ?

Maravilla33

gene_tunney wrote: »

Maravilla33 wrote: »

Is Vitali the greatest heavyweight ever? Of course hes not.

And as for this hes never really been beat nonsense? Whether you like it or not hes been beaten twice. Once, Lennox punched him in the face till he was deemed unfit to continue. I don't care who was ahead or what you think may have happened or if you think there should have been a rematch. We can only deal in facts and the fact is there is an L beside Vitali's name for that fight. It wasn't some robbery. He was stopped.

Against Byrd he basically quit. He was cruising in that fight. Just had to stay on his feet to win easily. Fair enough he got injured but there have been others with injuries who have fought on and not thrown in the towel in a fight they had in the bag.

Quitting against Byrd turned out to be an excellent decision. If he continued he risked ruining his shoulder permanently and his whoile career would be over just for one fight. Instead he lived to fight another day and went on to have a great career.

It shows he actually has a brain and an ability to think for himself. Besides, everyone knows he was kicking Byrd´s ass until he hurt his shoulder.

I don't disagree with you but I disagree with people who say he hasn't really been beat. He definitely has a brain but didn't have the courage in that fight that a lot of people would expect the greatest heavy ever to have. He gets far more slack than others who have quit..

gene_tunney

Maravilla33 wrote: »

I don't disagree with you but I disagree with people who say he hasn't really been beat. He definitely has a brain but didn't have the courage in that fight that a lot of people would expect the greatest heavy ever to have. He gets far more slack than others who have quit..

If you quit with a broken jaw or a sore foot then you deserve a doing, but now when your arm, your primary weapon in boxing is injured. With a broken jaw you can throw punches but not with a broken arm.

Maravilla33

gene_tunney wrote: »

If you quit with a broken jaw or a sore foot then you deserve a doing, but now when your arm, your primary weapon in boxing is injured. With a broken jaw you can throw punches but not with a broken arm.

I disagree. You have 2 arms. If someone like Eddie Chambers (who isn't known for being tough) can fight most of his fight last week with one arm then surely a monster like Vitali should be able to tough it out for the final 3 rounds of his fight. He was so far ahead he could have lost all 3 rounds and still won. I have huge respect for all boxers and especially someone like Vitali but he lost that fight because he quit. I cant give him a free card when others get slated.

candlegrease

Maravilla33 wrote: »

gene_tunney wrote: »

If you quit with a broken jaw or a sore foot then you deserve a doing, but now when your arm, your primary weapon in boxing is injured. With a broken jaw you can throw punches but not with a broken arm.

I disagree. You have 2 arms. If someone like Eddie Chambers (who isn't known for being tough) can fight most of his fight last week with one arm then surely a monster like Vitali should be able to tough it out for the final 3 rounds of his fight. He was so far ahead he could have lost all 3 rounds and still won. I have huge respect for all boxers and especially someone like Vitali but he lost that fight because he quit. I cant give him a free card when others get slated.

You do realise that Vitali just did exactly what you're talking about in his last fight against Chisora? He injured his shoulder in the 4th and finished out the next 8 rounds. It proves he can do it when it's necessary, ie his injury was far more serious in the Byrd fight.

Maravilla33

candlegrease wrote: »

You do realise that Vitali just did exactly what you're talking about in his last fight against Chisora? He injured his shoulder in the 4th and finished out the next 8 rounds. It proves he can do it when it's necessary, ie his injury was far more serious in the Byrd fight.

Whats the Chisora fight got to do with him giving up against Byrd? Fair play to him he fought through the pain against Chisora but that doesn't change the fact he quit against Byrd?

Vitali injured his rotator cuff in that fight.I've no doubt thats extremely painful but all he had to do was hang in there for three rounds. Hes so much bigger than Byrd he could have done it one handed and barely been hit. But he quit. PBF has went the distance with a rotator cuff injury. I remember Danny Williams fighting on and winning with a dislocated shoulder. There are countless others. Its a black mark against Vitali in my book.

Edit: Vitali got so much grief after quitting against Byrd he could never have done the same thing against Chisora.

Andrew Flexing

Maravilla33 wrote: »

I don't disagree with you but I disagree with people who say he hasn't really been beat. He definitely has a brain but didn't have the courage in that fight that a lot of people would expect the greatest heavy ever to have. He gets far more slack than others who have quit..

Who beat him?

Maravilla33

Andrew Flexing wrote: »

Who beat him?

A quick look at Boxrec will surely answer your question no? But seeing as I'm nice heres what I said earlier.

And as for this hes never really been beat nonsense? Whether you like it or not hes been beaten twice. Once, Lennox punched him in the face till he was deemed unfit to continue. I don't care who was ahead or what you think may have happened or if you think there should have been a rematch. We can only deal in facts and the fact is there is an L beside Vitali's name for that fight. It wasn't some robbery. He was stopped.

Against Byrd he basically quit. He was cruising in that fight. Just had to stay on his feet to win easily. Fair enough he got injured but there have been others with injuries who have fought on and not thrown in the towel in a fight they had in the bag.

So as you can see he has lost twice.

cowzerp

Maravilla33 wrote: »

Once, Lennox punched him in the face till he was deemed unfit to continue. I don't care who was ahead or what you think may have happened or if you think there should have been a rematch. We can only deal in facts and the fact is there is an L beside Vitali's name for that fight. It wasn't some robbery. He was stopped.

This was just bad luck and not down to been beaten-if anything this fight gave Vitali more respect, people realised he was the real deal..

The Byrd loss is a black mark on him i agree, but again it was a technicality

He has lost twice but i agree he has not been beaten.

Lewis not rematching confirmed he knew Vitali had his number.

Maravilla33

cowzerp wrote: »

This was just bad luck and not down to been beaten-if anything this fight gave Vitali more respect, people realised he was the real deal..

The Byrd loss is a black mark on him i agree, but again it was a technicality

He has lost twice but i agree he has not been beaten.

Lewis not rematching confirmed he knew Vitali had his number.

I've nothing against either Klitschko. I prefer Wlad but the Heavyweight division would have been a shambles for the last 10 years without them.

I don't agree with the Lennox point. Does that mean all cuts are simply bad luck? Lewis did the damage with punches, opened up a cut and then worked on it. It was unlucky for us as it stopped what was a great fight prematurely but Lewis won fair and square.

As for Lewis knowing Vitali had his number I disagree again. I can see both sides of the argument and at this stage any opinion is just pure speculation. Personally I think he should have rematched him but I don't for a second think he didn't because he was afraid.

Halloween Jack

Maravilla33 wrote: »

cowzerp wrote: »

This was just bad luck and not down to been beaten-if anything this fight gave Vitali more respect, people realised he was the real deal..

The Byrd loss is a black mark on him i agree, but again it was a technicality

He has lost twice but i agree he has not been beaten.

Lewis not rematching confirmed he knew Vitali had his number.

I've nothing against either Klitschko. I prefer Wlad but the Heavyweight division would have been a shambles for the last 10 years without them.

I don't agree with the Lennox point. Does that mean all cuts are simply bad luck? Lewis did the damage with punches, opened up a cut and then worked on it. It was unlucky for us as it stopped what was a great fight prematurely but Lewis won fair and square.

As for Lewis knowing Vitali had his number I disagree again. I can see both sides of the argument and at this stage any opinion is just pure speculation. Personally I think he should have rematched him but I don't for a second think he didn't because he was afraid.

Lewis was coming to the end of a glittering career, his preparation at that stage wasn't the best and he'd lost the hunger. Like it or not, Lewis is the best fighter vitali ever faced, and he lost. You could argue he had Lewis figured out, but I think a prime and properly motivated Lewis beats vitali, almost as big, good technique and defence and seriously heavy handed.

In fact, I'd say a thread about Lennox being the all time greatest is more valid (not that I think he is) beat vitali and a host of other (one-time) greats. Although he had a couple of very silly defeats, he avenged them and is one of few fighters to have defeated every man he ever faced.

Spazdarn

A lot to be said about Lennox's resume, but god did I find him boring to watch...

walshb

candlegrease wrote: »

You do realise that Vitali just did exactly what you're talking about in his last fight against Chisora? He injured his shoulder in the 4th and finished out the next 8 rounds. It proves he can do it when it's necessary, ie his injury was far more serious in the Byrd fight.

And Chisora was never ever a threat. Chisora was pretty useless that night.

Vit was beaten by Lewis fair and square. Had there not been a bad cut he could have won, but so could Lewis. That was definitely an in shape and close to prime Vitali meeting an over the hill, ring worn and out of shape Lewis.

Halloween Jack

ToiletFusion wrote: »

A lot to be said about Lennox's resume, but god did I find him boring to watch...

Yeah, thank god the k bros. came along and injected some much needed razzle-dazzle

gene_tunney

I agree, Vitali lost fair and square to Lennox. There was nothing in the fight but Vitali's cut was ridiculously deep and rightly it was stopped. It was a fat, out of shape unmotivated Lewis against an almost-prime Vitali.

magma69

Vitali fought one great fighter in his career and he lost. His record is **** compared to the likes of greats like Louis, Ali, Foreman, Frazier etc.

Vitali was unfortunate in that he fought in a very poor era and I think he'd be a tough fight head to head for any heavyweight but greatness is judged by achievement. The question posed by the OP is laughable.

magma69

cowzerp wrote: »

He has lost twice but i agree he has not been beaten.

So the fight being stopped due to injuries inflicted on Vitali's face from punches taken from his opponent does not equate to him being beaten? That's flawed.

MD1990

im not sure why the Klitcshko's are suddenly gettin so much praise
who have they beaten? nobodies
the reason there is no good Heavyweights from the US
is because all the top atlethes in the US are playing football

Andrew Flexing

Regarding Vitali's cut in the Lewis match, as far as I'm aware Vit said the cut was caused by a seam on Lewis' glove or tape that caused it in a clinch glove rather a punch. (i'll have to look for a reference for it)

walshb

Andrew Flexing wrote: »

Regarding Vitali's cut in the Lewis match, as far as I'm aware Vit said the cut was caused by a seam on Lewis' glove or tape that caused it in a clinch glove rather a punch. (i'll have to look for a reference for it)

He would say that!

gene_tunney

MD1990 wrote: »

im not sure why the Klitcshko's are suddenly gettin so much praise
who have they beaten? nobodies
the reason there is no good Heavyweights from the US
is because all the top atlethes in the US are playing football

Grossly incorrect post.

Football was around in the 70´s and in the 90´s, the so-called golden eras. Its an excuse made by Americans that all their top athletes play other sports in order to justify their current terrible crop of heavyweights. The fact is America nowadays has the highest obesity rate in the world and, consequently, is full of fat slobs. Bein a fat slob is not conducive to becoming a successful heavyweight.

Who have they beaten? Everyone they possibly can. The division has been cleaned out to such an extent that Vitali is resorting to fighting Charr and Wlad is being forced to rematch Thomson, whom he will brutally knock out a few days from now.

Bobby Baccala

Andrew Flexing wrote: »

Regarding Vitali's cut in the Lewis match, as far as I'm aware Vit said the cut was caused by a seam on Lewis' glove or tape that caused it in a clinch glove rather a punch. (i'll have to look for a reference for it)

You can see the right hand that opened that cut up if you watch the fight, no seam on a glove could open up a cut like that, it was massive. then he opened another cut under Vits eye and there was no way they would let him go on with 2 cuts that size around the one eye.

walshb

gene_tunney wrote: »

The fact is America nowadays has the highest obesity rate in the world and, consequently, is full of fat slobs. Bein a fat slob is not conducive to becoming a successful heavyweight.
.

What has the obesity rates in the U.S. got to do with this? The U.S. always had the highest rates in the world, and since the 80s I believe their population has maybe risen by 60 plus million people. The rates have risen, but this is never an exact science anyway. The U.S. has over 300 million people. There are many obese people, but there are even more non obese people.

gene_tunney

walshb wrote: »

What has the obesity rates in the U.S. got to do with this? The U.S. always had the highest rates in the world, and since the 80s I believe their population has maybe risen by 60 plus million people. The rates have risen, but this never an exact science anyway. The U.S. has over 300 million people. There are many obese people, but there are even more non obese people.

You often seem to have a tough time grasping my posts. Either that, or you´re deliberately being obtuse.

America´s obesity rates have risen quicker than any other country. In 1997 19% of adults were obese. As of 2010 36% are obese, and the number is still rising.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obesity_in_the_United_States

I´m not citing this as the sole reason for their decline in boxing but it shows that if a country has become so unhealthy so quickly it certainly doesn´t help their athletes. It´s a myth that they are no longer good at boxing because their athletes are in other sports. Their heavyweights are just being dominated by two Ukrainian brothers at the moment, and the US, who likes to think they are the best at everything, has to make excuses.

walshb

gene_tunney wrote: »

You often seem to have a tough time grasping my posts. Either that, or you´re deliberately being obtuse.

America´s obesity rates have risen quicker than any other country. In 1997 19% of adults were obese. As of 2010 36% are obese, and the number is still rising.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obesity_in_the_United_States

I´m not citing this as the sole reason for their decline in boxing but it shows that if a country has become so unhealthy so quickly it certainly doesn´t help their athletes. It´s a myth that they are no longer good at boxing because their athletes are in other sports. Their heavyweights are just being dominated by two Ukrainian brothers at the moment, and the US, who likes to think they are the best at everything, has to make excuses.

Nothing to do with being obtuse. Like I said obesity in the U.S. has always been that bit higher percentage wise than anywhere else. I don't need to read easily available statistics either.

You mention myth. Well, using obesity as some possible reason as to why the U.S just aren't producing HW talent as opposed to other sports taking the best athletes, that to me is a myth.

So, it's every bit a myth to think that obesity is a possible reason as to the decline in U.S. HW talent as it is to think that the decline is due to other sports taking the talent.

gene_tunney

walshb wrote: »

Nothing to dop with being obtuse. Like I said obesity in the U.S. has always been that bit higher percentage wise than anywhere else.

You mention myth. Well, using obesity as some possible reason as to why the U.S just aren't producing HW talent as opposed to other sports taking the best athletes, that to me is a myth.

Again, you take my words out of context. I didn´t cite it as the main reason, it was just a suggestion.

walshb

gene_tunney wrote: »

Again, you take my words out of context. I didn´t cite it as the main reason, it was just a suggestion.

And where oh where did I say that you were citing it as a MAIN reason?

A reason, possible reason. I never implied or claimed that you were using it as a main reason. Who's being obtuse here?

cowzerp

America going soft is another reason for the decline, boxers most always come from harder times/areas-plus boxing just don't as mainstream as it was in the 70's 80's etc in the states.

MD1990

gene_tunney wrote: »

Grossly incorrect post.

Football was around in the 70´s and in the 90´s, the so-called golden eras. Its an excuse made by Americans that all their top athletes play other sports in order to justify their current terrible crop of heavyweights. The fact is America nowadays has the highest obesity rate in the world and, consequently, is full of fat slobs. Bein a fat slob is not conducive to becoming a successful heavyweight.

Who have they beaten? Everyone they possibly can. The division has been cleaned out to such an extent that Vitali is resorting to fighting Charr and Wlad is being forced to rematch Thomson, whom he will brutally knock out a few days from now.

pathetic post
it is well known all the top athletes in the US are playing football or basketball because that is where the money is

cowzerp

MD1990 wrote: »

pathetic post
it is well known all the top athletes in the US are playing football or basketball because that is where the money is

Lose the attitude MD

People (Kids) starting out in sports are not thinking about money, flash cars and women, they're thinking about what they enjoy and usually what is accessible, Football and Basketball are very accessible in the states, Exactly the reason why they're not popular here.

Halloween Jack

gene_tunney wrote: »

Grossly incorrect post.

Football was around in the 70´s and in the 90´s, the so-called golden eras. Its an excuse made by Americans that all their top athletes play other sports in order to justify their current terrible crop of heavyweights. The fact is America nowadays has the highest obesity rate in the world and, consequently, is full of fat slobs. Bein a fat slob is not conducive to becoming a successful heavyweight.

Who have they beaten? Everyone they possibly can. The division has been cleaned out to such an extent that Vitali is resorting to fighting Charr and Wlad is being forced to rematch Thomson, whom he will brutally knock out a few days from now.

THis argument holds no weight whatsoever. This nation of 'fat slobs' will almost certainly win more medals in London than any other, there is hardly a competitive sport in the world that the americans dont excel at.

Obesity rates might be a factor in the decline in participation in sport across the board, but not for a single sport.

America still produces many world class athletes, despite their obesity rate, so the real question is why did someone like Le Bron James go into basketball when in a previous time, he may have gone into boxing?

I suspect the reasons are complex and manifold. We can certainly outline some factors, ie: Boxing being its own worst enemy (corruption etc), the disintegration of working class neighbourhoods (boxing's breeding ground) and perhaps the most fundamental: the fight game is hard and requires pain and dedication, probably to a greater extent than other sports which have become more lucrative for less sacrifice.