Peak Ali vs Peak Vitali Klitschko

tryingmybestt · 11-02-2012 5:15pm #1

peak vitali against peak ali from the 1960's.....who do you feel wins?

Jayob10 · 11-02-2012 6:02pm

this thread is going to be a shut out I feel :cool:

sxt · 11-02-2012 10:28pm

Vital Klitschko all the way. A 250 ilbs athletic man like Vitali Klitschko, who is significantly heavier , significantly harder hitting with significantly better boxing skills than anyone Ali ever fought, who has benefited from 50 years of sporting progress. He is a fighter that Ali would/could never have imagined encountering( nor should he have) as a fighter and could not have beaten in my opinion .

RiseToTheTop · 12-02-2012 5:21am

Earnie Shavers and Foreman both hit harder than Vitali. Ali took their shots and came back.

On the other hand Vitali never faced anyone who could move like Ali. We all know how Ali fares against men who can punch, meanwhile Vitali never fought anyone who even resembled Ali. Not even one shade.

I can see Ali dancing and comfortably outpointing Vitali Klitschko. (12 rounder or 15 rounder whichever way you wanna have it.)

(BTW, when was the last time Vitali weighed in at 250lbs??? He was 242 against Adamek.)

corny · 12-02-2012 2:41pm

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

Earnie Shavers and Foreman both hit harder than Vitali. Ali took their shots and came back.

On the other hand Vitali never faced anyone who could move like Ali. We all know how Ali fares against men who can punch, meanwhile Vitali never fought anyone who even resembled Ali. Not even one shade.

I can see Ali dancing and comfortably outpointing Vitali Klitschko. (12 rounder or 15 rounder whichever way you wanna have it.)

(BTW, when was the last time Vitali weighed in at 250lbs??? He was 242 against Adamek.)

Not that i disagree on who would win but you miss the fact Vitali never relies on his power. His style is unbelievably awkward to contend with not his power. He wouldn't be comfortably outpointed by anybody.

tryingmybestt · 12-02-2012 3:38pm

Ali's speed of foot, hand and reflexes will be too much for vitali

if ali's chin wasn't so good I'd give vitali a better chance because he's bound to land a few blows during the fight.....but ali has a granite chin and I agree that shavers and foremans punches were better than vitali's and ali took them no problem

i just can't see vitali landing often enough to trouble ali......add to the mix that vitali rarely goes to the body and it makes it harder for him.......ali's head is almost impossible to catch (peak 60's version) but his body is somewhat easier but vitali was definitely not a dedicated body puncher...

another major reason ali would win is speed of foot.....vitali is too slow to really pressure a 60's Ali.....a 60's ali was had such fast feet, constantly changing direction, feinting, in and out, landing and out again....

vitali's size and strength would definitely make it an interesting fight but I would go for Ali to win comfortably on points

i'd see ali stopping the younger klitschko fairly easily

tryingmybestt · 12-02-2012 3:41pm

corny wrote: »

Not that i disagree on who would win but you miss the fact Vitali never relies on his power.

i wouldn't agree vitali never relies on his power.....most of wins are by stoppage so i think it's fair to say his power is an important element of his gameplan

vitali is also awkward due to his style, size and reach

it hink the fact that vitali has awesome power influences how his opponents fight him....if he didnt hit as ahrd his opponents would attack him much more than they do

i feel vitali relies heavily on his strength and power as well as his style, chin, size etc.

Spazdarn · 12-02-2012 3:59pm

Despite Vitali being a man mountain, I'd see Ali winning on points. His footwork, speed and mobility is something Vitali has never come close to facing and I could see Ali fighting his type of fight.

cowzerp · 12-02-2012 4:14pm

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

On the other hand Vitali never faced anyone who could move like Ali. We all know how Ali fares against men who can punch, meanwhile Vitali never fought anyone who even resembled Ali. Not even one )

Ali never faced anyone like Vitali-6,8" with a great jab and lead hook and extremely hard to get close to without getting hit, he fought big men but not like Vitali. Ali's fast but getting close to Vitali is dangerous.

tryingmybestt · 12-02-2012 4:22pm

vitali has never fought anyone with with ali's combination of speed and reach

ali would be in and out before vitali could blink

ali and vitali had the same reach so i don't think it would be too hard for ali to land his excellent jab and step in with quick rights and hooks

walshb · 12-02-2012 4:39pm

cowzerp wrote: »

Ali never faced anyone like Vitali-6,8" with a great jab and lead hook and extremely hard to get close to without getting hit, he fought big men but not like Vitali. Ali's fast but getting close to Vitali is dangerous.

That height and reach combined make Vit a real tricky customer. Plus, he was tough as hell, heavy handed, clever and very durable.

I know Vit never made my fantasy tournament.

But here it goes:

Clay/Ali vs. Vit: 6-4 Ali
Tyson vs. Vit: 8-2 Tyson
Foreman vs. Vit: 7-3 Foreman; with many fights nip and tuck.
Bowe vs. Vit: Bowe 6-4
Liston vs. Vit: 6-4 Liston
Marciano-Vit: Really, too much size here. 8-2 Vit
Holmes vs. Vit: 6-4 Holmes
Louis vs. Vit: 7-3 Vit
Lewis vs. Vit: 7-3 Lewis
Holyfiled vs. Vit: 7-3 Holyfield.

If one looks, I give an edge to the more aggressive and attacking fighters vs. Vit. The boxer, like Holmes and Ali, may find it a wee bit trickier.

Of them all I think a peak Tyson is the most dangerous to Vitali. Wicked hitter, fit as hell, solid beard and defense and aggressive all the time.

tryingmybestt · 12-02-2012 4:46pm

ali fought foreman.....foreman had an 82 inch reach....vitali's reach was 80

Vitali v Ali

Speed - huge advantage Ali
Power - advantage Vitali
Feet - huge advantage Ali
chin - equal
boxing ability - advantage ali
accuracy - advantage ali
punch output - advantage ali
more exciting to watch - huge advantage ali

in a 12 round fight I'd have Ali winning 8 rounds to 4

Daroxtar · 12-02-2012 5:08pm

tryingmybestt wrote: »

ali fought foreman.....foreman had an 82 inch reach....vitali's reach was 80

Vitali v Ali

Speed - huge advantage Ali
Power - advantage Vitali
Feet - huge advantage Ali
chin - equal
boxing ability - advantage ali
accuracy - advantage ali
punch output - advantage ali
more exciting to watch - huge advantage ali

in a 12 round fight I'd have Ali winning 8 rounds to 4

Quite simply the most ridiculous factor in deciding a fight I have ever seen

tryingmybestt · 12-02-2012 5:19pm

Daroxtar wrote: »

Quite simply the most ridiculous factor in deciding a fight I have ever seen

it obviously wasnt a factor lol

i was comparing their styles

walshb · 12-02-2012 5:30pm

Daroxtar wrote: »

Quite simply the most ridiculous factor in deciding a fight I have ever seen

Tell that to some of the judges!

corny · 12-02-2012 7:17pm

tryingmybestt wrote: »

i wouldn't agree vitali never relies on his power.....most of wins are by stoppage so i think it's fair to say his power is an important element of his gameplan

No one said he was weak. He's a powerful puncher no doubt but if you look at his record very few of his fights (later fights that is) are ended by flash early knock outs. Its the accumulation of punches that often destroys his opponents in the 8-12 rounds.

Best way to look at it. His power never gets him out of trouble because his style dictates that he's never really troubled in the first place.

These comparisons are hugely subjective and often futile if you ask me but no one should underestimate how tough an obstacle Vitali would be for any fighter in history. A man with zero weaknesses and physical assets nearly unmatched isn't bettered without a fight. No one wins 8 rounds against him in my book.

walshb · 12-02-2012 7:25pm

Ali's big issue here is connecting clean and often to a man 4 inches taller. Ali loved to head hunt. He was not one to go to the body.

cowzerp · 12-02-2012 7:34pm

Ali is Ali so I'd never write him off but it's refreshing to see Vitali get some credit on here, I thought this was going to be the typical nostalgia posts that past fans usually go by.

runboyrun · 12-02-2012 8:02pm

I feel Ali is too good.

From current boxer

sxt · 13-02-2012 5:07am

Can anybody name any other sport where a 60s version would be competitive with today's equivalent... Do you think a mcenroe, Connors would be able to compete with nadal or Djokovic ? How do you think a gaa or soccer team from back then would do against today's crop.what about the the Olympic athletes from way back then, how many gold medals would they win today ? Is boxing somehow exempt from this dramatic physical scientific observable progression in all other sports... Vitali would seem like some futuristic terminator made in a lab compared to these smaller weaker less refined athletes.(that's not being disrespectful, but is true of every sport, 40/50 years is along time for humans to learn of new and better ways to improve themselves in for their chosen sport) . The klitschko brothers dominance would be even greater than it is today in my opinion.

runboyrun · 13-02-2012 10:19am

sxt wrote: »

Can anybody name any other sport where a 60s version would be competitive with today's equivalent... Do you think a mcenroe, Connors would be able to compete with nadal or Djokovic ? How do you think a gaa or soccer team from back then would do against today's crop.what about the the Olympic athletes from way back then, how many gold medals would they win today ? Is boxing somehow exempt from this dramatic physical scientific observable progression in all other sports... Vitali would seem like some futuristic terminator made in a lab compared to these smaller weaker less refined athletes.(that's not being disrespectful, but is true of every sport, 40/50 years is along time for humans to learn of new and better ways to improve themselves in for their chosen sport) . The klitschko brothers dominance would be even greater than it is today in my opinion.

I've often heard people saying that they feel boxers today are worse than boxers from older generations because they don't fight regularly enough.

The Ring's pound for pound bext boxers list is dominated by older generation fighters, as is the Ring pound for pound hardest punchers list.

That must mean something?

cowzerp · 13-02-2012 11:01am

runboyrun wrote: »

I've often heard people saying that they feel boxers today are worse than boxers from older generations because they don't fight regularly enough.

and it will always be said-it's easy to say how great people are when their career is over compared to someone still in it-legend tends to make people be biased.

walshb · 13-02-2012 12:57pm

sxt wrote: »

Can anybody name any other sport where a 60s version would be competitive with today's equivalent... Do you think a mcenroe, Connors would be able to compete with nadal or Djokovic ? How do you think a gaa or soccer team from back then would do against today's crop.what about the the Olympic athletes from way back then, how many gold medals would they win today ? Is boxing somehow exempt from this dramatic physical scientific observable progression in all other sports... Vitali would seem like some futuristic terminator made in a lab compared to these smaller weaker less refined athletes.(that's not being disrespectful, but is true of every sport, 40/50 years is along time for humans to learn of new and better ways to improve themselves in for their chosen sport) . The klitschko brothers dominance would be even greater than it is today in my opinion.

In many other sports today's athletes are better, stronger, faster etc, because of progress and diet and technology, AND, Money. Boxing is to me the ONE sport where that progress etc has not really changed much, and when one looks at some of the world champs today, they have seriously regressed. Look at he HWs, apart from Klits, and none would be champs in the 60s or 70s.

Take some of the champions today. Some of the top contenders. Mackilin, Lee, Chavez, Sturm to name a few. Theses guys wouldn't get top ten ratings during the 60s of 70s. Can you imagine SRR, Fullmer, Jake, Monzon in there with Sturm or Chavez or Lee? Massacre. And, as said previously, today's men take advantage of previous day weigh in. So, Lee may be a LHW, Chavez too. Can you imagine them giys in the ring with Spinks or Ezzard Charles?

Yes, there will always be men from today that could compete in any era. But, when I looks at the top fighters today, nothing tells me that these lads were superior to men from 30-40-50 years ago.

In other sports money has made a massive difference. Everything is professional. Big money keeps athletes hungry, determined and focused.

cowzerp · 13-02-2012 1:08pm

I disagree, apart from the obvious scientific improvements to training, nutrition and rest and recovery knowledge there is also much for technical boxers around now, most boxers are technical where as years ago most where fighters, A good Boxer beats a good fighter most times out and thats why it has turned this way-of course there where technical Boxers back then but they where in the minority and usually dominated anyway.

walshb · 13-02-2012 1:17pm

cowzerp wrote: »

I disagree, apart from the obvious scientific improvements to training, nutrition and rest and recovery knowledge there is also much for technical boxers around now, most boxers are technical where as years ago most where fighters, A good Boxer beats a good fighter most times out and thats why it has turned this way-of course there where technical Boxers back then but they where in the minority and usually dominated anyway.

The point about technique is noted, and agreed with, but, still do not see them being better because of it. They may have a little better technique, but someting else is missing. I believe that years ago the frequency that they fought etc may have made them better, and also, the depth pool. Today and from recent years boxing is NOT the sport of choice. Years ago it was massively popular. That leads to so many more taking it up, and producing great talent.

I look around at some of the world champs today, and some of them are quite ordinary and IMO would never have made it back in the 60s and 70s as champions.

tryingmybestt · 13-02-2012 3:32pm

compare the top 10 boxers of any division today with the top 10 from the 70's and say which era is better......if any.......i definitely doubt today's boxers are better....they've improved in some areas such as diet and new training techniques but also they've become worse in other areas such as older training methods, fighting regurlarly etc.

the 70's HW's are seriously better than the current crop

sxt · 14-02-2012 9:06pm

tryingmybestt wrote: »

compare the top 10 boxers of any division today with the top 10 from the 70's and say which era is better......if any.......i definitely doubt today's boxers are better....they've improved in some areas such as diet and new training techniques but also they've become worse in other areas such as older training methods, fighting regurlarly etc.

the 70's HW's are seriously better than the current crop

None of the 70's version boxers would have been able to compete with Vitali or Vlad, especially with their brawling, open defense styles. George Foreman has the best chance of that generation, he would have had a punchers chance, especially against Vladamir, but he was too slow and would be too easy to hit often by much bigger , quicker, fitter men.

Vital klitschko against a 6o's Ali is a fight like that would not be sanctioned today because of the overwhelming size difference! He would not be able to out stamina a relentless, clinical opponent with an overwhelming power and size advantage with boxing skills and speed unmatched for men of his size

The klitschko's are a different breed of fighter even in any era . The first fighters ever of their mammoth size, with serious athlethic ability .They are also very talented boxers who have honed their skills to become completely Dominant . They usually don't lose any rounds. Vitali had probably lost maybe 4 rounds in the last decade?

walshb · 14-02-2012 9:15pm

sxt wrote: »

Vital klitschko against a 6o's Ali is a fight like that would not be sanctioned today because of the overwhelming size difference! He would not be able to out stamina a relentless, clinical opponent with an overwhelming power and size advantage with boxing skills and speed unmatched for men of his size
?

Adamek gets sanctioning, but a 60s Clay/Ali does not?

Haye gets sanctioning.....

What if Clay/Ali piled on 60 lbs and turned up like Danny Willliams?

walshb · 14-02-2012 9:20pm

I need to make a correction.

Vit does make my fantasy tournament and gets 38 points. That puts him about 8th or 9th all time in a fantasy ten fight series tournament.

sxt · 14-02-2012 10:55pm

walshb wrote: »

Adamek gets sanctioning, but a 60s Clay/Ali does not?

Haye gets sanctioning.....

What if Clay/Ali piled on 60 lbs and turned up like Danny Willliams?

Sorry my bad! I thought he was fighting at cruiserweight type weights for most of the 60's

I think Ali would look a bit pudgy if he put on 60 ilbs, might lose a bit of zip in his footwork too!:P

RiseToTheTop · 14-02-2012 11:00pm

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.

I would leave my decision up to the boxers and whether they have enough fight in them, not advances in fields.

I don't think the size difference is huge (pardon the pun), Ali fought at around 220, Vitali Klitschko very rarely above 250. There would be around 25lbs difference, which is not huge in heavyweight terms. Even in the lower weight classes (lightweight, middleweight.) opponents can rehydrate while the other fight doesn't, and the rehydrated fighter can weight 20lbs more. But the non rehydrated fighter can still win, and often does. (And that is in the lower weight classes where the weight matters more.)

cowzerp · 14-02-2012 11:20pm

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 · 14-02-2012 11:37pm

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 · 15-02-2012 12:08am

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 · 15-02-2012 12:43am

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 · 15-02-2012 12:54am

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 · 15-02-2012 1:03am

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 · 15-02-2012 3:46am

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 · 15-02-2012 5:59am

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 · 15-02-2012 9:12am

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 · 15-02-2012 9:34am

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 · 15-02-2012 9:40am

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 · 15-02-2012 10:23am

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 · 15-02-2012 11:30am

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 · 15-02-2012 1:56pm

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 · 15-02-2012 2:03pm

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 · 15-02-2012 2:12pm

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

walshb · 15-02-2012 2:16pm

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 · 16-02-2012 1:06pm

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 · 17-02-2012 12:47pm

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 · 17-02-2012 12:55pm

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.

Peak Ali vs Peak Vitali Klitschko

Peak Ali vs Peak Vitali Klitschko.............who wins? 67 votes

Comments